TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (2) TMI 134
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te of exemption dated 29-7-1964 was granted by the Central Excise Collector, Kanpur to the petitioner. It exempted the petitioner "from payment of duty on the 125 M.T. of Straw Board or Pulp Board including Grey Board in a financial year." The petitioner says that he was availing of the said exemption and not paying any duty. While so, he was served with a notice of demand in Form D.D. 2 dated 26-7-1969/19-8-1969 calling upon him to pay a sum of Rs. 1,25,765/- towards the duty on Pulp Board manufactured by him. The petitioner says that he made a representation against the said demand but to no avail before the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals). The appellate authority allowed the appeal by its order dated 20-12-1976 on the ground that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is case and, therefore, the demand raised against him is confirmed. 4. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents, it is stated that the petitioner was not really entitled to exemption and that he obtained the exemption by misrepresentation of facts and by playing fraud upon the authorities. Inasmuch as the exemption was obtained fraudulently, it is submitted, the said exemption was withdrawn. It is also submitted that a criminal complaint was also laid against the petitioner under Section 420 I.P.C. It is submitted that demand for duty was validly raised and that even after the earlier order the petitioner did not produce any material to substantiate his case, for which reason the demand was confirmed. 5. In the rejoinder affidavi....