TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (7) TMI 125
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y. A demand for excise duty in the sum of Rs. 28.93 crores was raised for the period 1978 to 1983. On 19th April, 1984 a second show cause notice was issued to the assessee. It was in respect of its Baroda factory. It related to period 1978 to 1983 and demanded Rs. 35.32 crores by way of excise duty. On 2nd September, 1985 a third show cause notice was issued to the assessee which related to its Bombay and Baroda factories. It sought to make the assessee and two of its job workers liable to excise duty in the sum of Rs. 13.37 crores for the period 1st July, 1978 to 30th June, 1980. The third show cause notice was issued by the Deputy Director of Anti-Evasion, Central Excise, New Delhi. 4.In 1984 the assessee filed a writ petition before th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Commissioner (L & A) as Collector of Central Excise to apply to the Tribunal for determination of the questions therein stated, which arose out of the adjudication order dated 21st August, 1987 passed by the Director (L & A) on the three show cause notices, heard and dealt with together. The order of the Central Board was endorsed, amongst others, to the Principal Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi. 6.On 16th September, 1994 the assessee filed appeals before the Tribunal against the said adjudication order insofar as it related to the first and second show cause notices, which was adverse to it. 7.On 14th December, 1995 an application for clarification/directions was made by the Commissioner (L & A), Customs and Central Excise, New De....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that he came to know of the Board's order only on or immediately after 7th December, 1995. Accordingly, it held that the Revenue's appeal against the said adjudication order was in time. The Tribunal then noted the contention of the assessee that the assessment order had traversed beyond the scope of the grounds contained in the first and second show cause notices. The Tribunal saw no reason why the details regarding extra profit margin submitted in the third show cause notice should not be looked into for the purpose of the first and second show cause notices. It held that "the allegations contained in the third show cause notice which are relevant and apposite to the period covered by first and second show cause notices can be looked int....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt dated 20th June, 1984 which required that the adjudication order should not be communicated to the assessee but should be kept in a sealed envelope. He submitted that it was in consonance with the spirit of the order of the High Court that the said assessment order had not been looked at by the Board under the provisions of Section 35E and that, therefore, the period during which the said assessment order remained in a sealed envelope should not be taken into consideration; in other words, that the said assessment order should be deemed to bear the date on which it was removed from the sealed envelope, i.e., 18th June, 1991, from which date the appeal was in time. 12.The High Court's order dated 20th June, 1984 required the Revenue not ....