WORTHINGTON PUMP INDIA Vs. CCE, MEERUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the impugned order, the Collector confirmed the demand of Rs. 47,182.80 under Rule 9 (2) read with proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 40,000/ -.

(2.) THE facts of the case briefly stated are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of submersible pump sets and electrical motors and parts thereof. They were availing exemption under Notf. No. 67/86 dt. 10.2.86 on parts of electric motors used captively in the submersible pump sets. This notification was rescind by Notf. No. 129/88 dt. 1.3.86. However, the concession was again introduced by Notf. No. 142/88 dt. 18.4.88. The appellants however availed the benefit of Notf. No. 67/86 during the period 1.3.88 to 17.4.88 when the concession was withdrawn. Accordingly a SCN was issued to the appellants asking them to explain as to why the duty should not be demanded from them during the period 1.3.88 to 17.4.88. SCN was issued on 21.12.89.

(3.) IN reply to the SCN, the appellants submitted that it was in June, 1988 when they came to know that the Notfn. No. 67/86 dt. 10.2.86 had been rescinded and that on 18.3.88 they had approached the Collector and on 21.3.88 they approached the Board for consideration of their case under Section 11C for the period 1.3.88 to 17.4.88. They also contended that the demand was time barred; that there was no malafide intention on the part of the appellants to evade payment of duty. It was submitted that the extended period beyond six months for demanding duty was not applicable to their case.