COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., BANGALORE Vs. KPTCL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against OIA No. 13/2006 dated 7 -2 -2006.

(2.) THE assessee is working under the self assessment scheme. It means that more trust is placed on him and he is required to correctly assess the duty payable on the excisable goods. Sec. 4 of the Act and the Valuation Rules lay down the provisions for arriving at the correct value on which duty is to be paid. The assessee has admitted that the valuation done by him was wrong. Simply because he is a Government Company, it cannot be argued that the infraction of the law has to be condoned.

(3.) IN the case CCE v. Chemphar Drugs reported in 1989 (40) E.L.T. 276 (S.C.), the Honble Assistant Commissioner has held that the extended period was not invokable in the facts and circumstances of that case, as the Tribunal had come to a finding of fact that all information was already with the department. In this case, the assessee in his returns or otherwise has not informed that the goods were not sold but used by their other units. Therefore, this is a clear case of suppression of facts and extended period of limitation under Sec. 11A is applicable to the case.