(1.) HEARD both sides.
(2.) THE Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 11th February, 2004 remanded the matter to the Tribunal only on the issue of limitation. On merit, Hon'ble Supreme Court decided against the appellant. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:
(3.) THE contention of the appellant is that the show -cause notice was issued on the ground that the appellant mis -stated and suppressed the facts by misdeclaring the assessable value of ceiling fans with regulators with intent to evade payment of duty. The contention of the appellant is that they filed price list in respect of fans vide price list No. 25/84 dated 11.12.84 where they specifically mentioned that the complete fans without regulators were being cleared and sold by the appellant. The appellants were not manufacturing regulators and they were procuring regulators from other manufacturers on payment of duty and necessary permission was granted by the Revenue authorities vide letter dated 28.12.84 on the condition that the separate record and separate stock is to be maintained regarding the regulators. The appellants were clearing the fans and regulators under separate invoices, which is known to revenue, therefore, no suppression can be alleged against the appellant.