MUHAMMED ISMAIL MILLS Vs. CESTAT, CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred against the Final Order No. 1226 of 2009 in Appeal No. E/712/2002 passed by the CESTAT. The appellant has been doing manufacture of cotton yarn. Further it has used to receive job work from M/s. Raghavendra Spinners Limited, 24/3, Anna Nagar, Tirunelveli. Under the said circumstances, the Department has issued a show cause notice dated 3-8-1998, wherein it has been specifically stated that by way of suppression of material facts, the appellant has evaded in paying Central Excise Duty. Under the said circumstances the appellant has been directed to pay the amount mentioned therein within the stipulated period. The demand made in the form of show cause notice, dated 3-8-1998 has been upheld in Order-in-Original No. 16 of 1999, dated 30-8-1999 by the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai and the same has been challenged before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Tiruchirapalli, wherein the demand made by the Department as well as order passed in order-in-original No. 16 of 1999 have been set aside. Against the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Tiruchirapalli, Appeal No. E/172/2002 has been filed by the Department before the CESTAT.

(2.) The CESTAT, after considering the rival contentions put forth on either side, has allowed Appeal No. E/172/2002 and thereby set aside the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Tiruchirapalli. Against the final order passed by the CESTAT, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee as an appellant.

(3.) The short point raised in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is as to whether the claim of the Department is barred by limitation, since the period started from 28-1-1997 to 31-3-1997.