2025 (6) TMI 1351

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ER ( JUDICIAL ) And HON'BLE MR PULLELA NAGESWARA RAO, MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) Mr. Raghavendra B. H., Advocate for the Appellant Mr. Maneesh Akhoury, Assistant Commissioner ( AR ) for the Respondent ORDER PER : DR. D. M. MISRA Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. These appeals are filed against Order-in-Appeal No.241/2013 dated 17.12.2013 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Large T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000, show-cause notice was issued to them on 03.06.2011 proposing to recover differential duty for the period from October 2010 to June 2013 amounting to Rs.9,59,802/- along with interest and penalty. On adjudication, demand was confirmed with interest and penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. The appellant, in the present appeal, is not contesting the issue on merit, however, the learned advocate appearing for the appellant vehemently argued that invoking extended period in the present case is uncalled for as there is no misdeclaration or suppression of facts on the part of the appellant. 7. We find that initially the view....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Court also. In this scenario, when the principle of law was not settled and views have been expressed about the applicability of Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 differently by various Benches of the Tribunal and as the issue relates to pure question of interpretation of law, invoking larger period of limitation cannot be sustained. Beside....