COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. STEEL CAST LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the Appellant, Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhavnagar, has challenged order dated December 12, 2008 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal), proposing the following questions:

(2.) The Respondent-Assessee is engaged in manufacturing of casting and casting articles falling under Chapter Heading No. 84/73, respectively, of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. A show-cause notice dated November 7, 2002 came to be issued to the Assessee in relation to the period October 16, 1998 to December 2001, calling upon it to show cause as to why its application dated March 18, 2002 for registration under the category of "scientific and technical consultancy services" applied for under Section 69 of the Finance Act, 1994 ("the Act") should not be rejected for the said category and should not be considered for grant of registration under the category of "management consultancy services" ; as to why the service tax amounting to Rs. 1,11,800 with interest should not be recovered ; and as to why interest under Section 75 of the Act, and the penalty under Sections 75A, 76, 77 and 78 of the Act should not be levied.

(3.) The Assessee, in the proceedings before the adjudicating authority, raised a specific contention that the extended period of limitation could not have been invoked in the light of the fact that there was no suppression on the part of the Assessee. The adjudicating authority in its order dated August 17, 2004 has merely stated that the Assessee had suppressed the fact that it was providing management consultancy services and had also suppressed the value of taxable service provided and as such, was liable to penalty under Section 78 of the Act and has held that the services provided by the Assessee fell within the purview of "management consultancy services" and confirmed the duty demand along with interest and penalties as proposed in the show-cause notice. It was also held that the Assessee was liable to be registered under the category of "management consultancy services".