2002 (7) TMI 151

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....leached fabrics, part of which was used for manufacture of interlining cotton fabrics. Both were leviable to duties of Excise as well as to Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957. For the bleached fabrics so used, the assessees had, in their declaration under Rule 173B claimed benefit of Notification No. 67/95-C.E., dated 16-3-95. In the Show cause notice dated 23-7-99, it was alleged that during the period August, 1996 to February, 1998, the assessees had evaded payment of additional duties of excise leviable on the bleached fabrics inasmuch as the mentioned notification exempted such goods only from the payment of basic duties of excise and not from the payment of additional duties of excise. The extended peri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Parikh, Advocate for the appellants and Shri P.K. Agarwal for the respondent. 6.At the time of hearing, the same arguments as were made before the Commissioner were advanced before us and citation was made of the Tribunal's orders and also by the Supreme Court. 7.We have seen the declarations filed by the assessee and also the flow chart which shows bleaching as the process in the manufacture of powder coated fabrics which are interlining fabrics. We have also seen the classification declarations filed from time to time including those filed during the period in dispute. Some of the declarations are computer generated in which the claim for exemption under Notfn. No. 67/95 is made by hand. On the other hand, the declarations made on 1-11....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of duty as well as without payment of duty. Shri Deven Parekh also refers us to an earlier show cause notice dated 29-9-98 covering a later period in which from page 2 thereof it is shown that RT 12 returns were being filed. If it is so, it could not be stated that the department was not in a position to verify the fact that the additional duties were not paid. On the basis of the analysis, we find substance in the assessee's claim that there was no intention to evade payment of duty. 9.Shri Deven Parekh also shows us the earlier cited show case notice dated 29-9-98 which covers the period March, 1998 to May, 1998. The show cause notice leading to the present dispute is dated 22-7-99 and covers the period August, 1996 to February, 98. He c....