2008 (1) TMI 347

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellant. Shri B.L. Meena, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P. Karthikeyan, Member (T)]. - The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of HDPE bags with liners. They got the goods manufactured by a job worker. For supply of HDPE bags to M/s. Thirumalai Chemicals Ltd. (TCL), TCL had arranged supply of additional liners for the bags directly to the job worker. The impugned demand was ma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... against the allegation of suppression of facts was raised for the first time before that authority in rejecting their said claim. The ld. Counsel took us through the reply to the Show Cause Notice and submissions before the Commissioner (Appeals), wherein the appellants had claimed that they had not suppressed any facts from the department. As suppression of facts with intention to evade payment ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....submissions made by both sides. As rightly submitted by the ld. Counsel for the appellants, the plea regarding bona fide belief and invokability of suppression of facts made by the appellants has not been controverted by the Commissioner (Appeals). The lower appellate authority has not rejected their claim of bona fide belief or not suppressing any facts from the department as incorrect. He reject....