1976 (8) TMI 53

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a have considered the points raised by the petitioners in their R.A., those urged during the course of personal hearing and the material on record. The petitioners have contended that according to Sub-section (2) of Section 40 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, as it stood prior to amendment even the Govt. could not initiate legal proceedings against the assessee after the expiry of 6 mont....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tral Excise Rules and as such the mischief of Sub-section (3) of the Section 40 was precluded. 2. Secondly, the petitioners have contended that the goods were cleared and assessments were regularly made by the Central Excise Officers and accordingly the short-levy could be recovered only in accordance with the provisions of Rule 10. They have thus argued that the demand in question was time bar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....titioners were in fact composite mills the short-levy was detected and the demand for duty was issued. Since the petitioners cleared the goods contrary to the approved price list, the short-levy cannot be treated to be on account of the reasons mentioned in Rule 10 and accordingly application of this rule is precluded. The Government hold that the short-levy was correctly recoverable in accordance....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... issued in the name of these three units were exhibited and it was emphasised that for the purpose of Central Excise Law each unit was a separate entity and since M/s. Delhi Cloth Mill (Silk Mill) on its own did not come within the definition of a composite mill, it could not be treated so merely because the owner M/s. Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. was a composite mill. The Government do ....