The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the mere omission to give correct information was not s suppression of fact unless it deliberately stop payment of duty.
Datafield India Private Limited, the appellant assessee holds central excise registration and was engaged in the manufacture of telephone cords and imported raw materials without payment of Customs duty, Special Customs Duty (SCD), and Additional Customs duty (ACD).
The assessee appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) for upholding the original authority’s duty demand along with interest and imposed equal penalty under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with section 174 of CGST Act, 2017.
R. Meenakshi Sundaram, the counsel for the assessee contended that the show cause notice had been issued invoking an extended period of limitation alleging that the assessee had suppressed facts intending to evade payment of duty and the allegation was baseless and there are no grounds for invoking the extended period.
Further submitted that the assessee had enclosed the details and documents about the total production, export quantity of sales, import of raw materials, and procurement of raw materials from others.
M. Ambe, the counsel for the revenue contended that the net foreign exchange calculated by the assessee was incorrect and it had projected a higher percentage of foreign exchange.
The bench observed that mere omission to give correct information was not suppression of facts unless it was deliberate to stop payment of duty.
The two-member panel comprising Sulekha Beevi C.S (Judicial) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) quashed the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to limitation while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
