Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Caprihans India Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Caprihans India Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Apr 10, 2002

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/27997

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/27997
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: G Srinivasan
Decided On: Apr 10, 2002
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Respondent

Caprihans India Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In: (2002)(146)ELT71Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. in the impugned order, the appeal was dismissed by the collector of central excise (appeals) holding as follows :- "their plea that the demand is hit by limitation is one which has to be accepted in view of the fact that there is no suppression, fraud, mis-statement etc. in the show cause notice. in the absence of any such allegation it would be improper to invoke the longer period of five years. the demand is for the period january, 1980, and the show cause notice has been issued on 10-1-1985." 2. the learned dr arguing for the appellant would stress the word "misuse" used in the show cause notice. when confronted with a query from the bench, he accepted that the word "misuse" is not found in any of the provisions of the central excise act or the rules enabling the department to issue notice beyond the period of six months. hence the appeal of the department is devoid of merits and is dismissed.

Full Judgment

1. In the impugned order, the appeal was dismissed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) holding as follows :- "Their plea that the demand is hit by limitation is one which has to be accepted in view of the fact that there is no suppression, fraud, mis-statement etc. in the show cause notice. In the absence of any such allegation it would be improper to invoke the longer period of five years. The demand is for the period January, 1980, and the show cause notice has been issued on 10-1-1985." 2. The learned DR arguing for the appellant would stress the word "misuse" used in the show cause notice. When confronted with a query from the Bench, he accepted that the word "misuse" is not found in any of the provisions of the Central Excise Act or the Rules enabling the department to issue notice beyond the period of six months. Hence the appeal of the department is devoid of merits and is dismissed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs Caprihans India Ltd. Same Subject Excise Same Judge G Srinivasan