2008 (11) TMI 173

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order].- This appeal filed by M/s. Tamilnadu Asbestos (Pipes), Karur challenges an order of demand of Rs. 7,05,592/- under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act. M/s. Tamilnadu Asbestos had collected during the period 1998-2000, a total amount of Rs. 7,05,592/- from the buyers of its final product asbestos cement pipes representing the same as excisable duty but did not remit the same to the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....owing case law in support of this argument:- (i) Government of India v. Citadal Fine Pharmaceuticals - 1989 (42) E.L.T. 515 (S.C.) (ii) CC v. Electronics Research Ltd. - 2000 (123) E.L.T. 751 (Tri.-SZB). (iii) Collector of Customs, Madras v. TVS Whirlpool Ltd. - 1996 (86) E.L.T. 144 (Tri.) (iv) Siddeshwar SSK Ltd. v. CCE, Aurangabad - 1997 (92) E.L.T. 616 (Tribunal) (v) Thandava Co-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Customs Act, 1962, for warehoused goods, the period laid down in Section 28 is to be applied. In Siddeshwar SSK Ltd. v. CCE (supra) and Thandava Co-operative Sugars Ltd. v. CCE (supra), the Tribunal found the demands for recovery of amounts collected representing the same as duty invoking provisions of Section 11D to be barred by limitation as the respective demand notices had been issued beyond ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pe of Section 11D as it existed at the material time. The matter deserved to be referred to a Larger Bench. 4. I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by the learned Jt. CDR. Section 11D of the Act was amended following a decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the Eternit Everest case reported as 1997 (89) E.L.T. 28 (Mad.). The provisions of Section 11D ....