1. Vide the impugned order, the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) has set aside the demand of Rs.8,96,437/- confirmed against the assessees on the ground that they had rendered “Management, Repair and Maintenance Services” as well as “Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services” on the ground that the demand raised for the period July-03 to December-07 was barred by limitation as the show-cause notice was issued only on 24.9.08 which is after a period of 1= years from the date of recording of the assessee’s statement.
2. I have heard both sides. I agree with the Revenue that demand cannot be held to be barred on the ground on which the lower appellate authority has held so, in the light of the apex court-s decision in Mathania Fabrics Vs CCE Jaipur [2008 (221) ELT 481 (SC)]. The extended period of limitation of 5 years is available to the department, if assessees are found to be guilty of suppression or misstatement with intention to evade payment of duty. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remit the case for fresh decision on merits [the Commissioner (Appeals) has not recorded any finding on the merit of the demand] to the lower appellate authority who shall pass fresh orders after extending a reasonable opportunity of being heard in their defence.
3. The appeal is thus allowed by way of remand. The cross-objection is only in the nature of comments upon/reply to Revenue’s appeal and is accordingly dismissed.