The Commissioner Of Central Excise vs Surya Fine Chemicals on 11 September, 2018
22. These factual aspects and circumstances, have been considered by Tribunal, and going through the same, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal, as there was no malafide pleaded by the appellant, in the show cause notice dated 03.01.2001 against the 1st respondent, to suppress the fact before the authority and ought to have made such statement to lead the Department to hold that the 1st respondent had intention to cause evasion of duty. It is an admitted fact that the confusion as to whether the goods would fall under Chapter 21 or Chapter 32 would be cleared only after the finding of the Judgment rendered by the CEGAT, Special Bench, in the case of [Collector of Customs, Excise Vs Roha Dye Chem Pvt Ltd] reported in 1989 (41) E.L.T.667 (Tribunal), which later came to be confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 1997 (93) E.L.T.329 (S.C), when the order passed by the CEGAT, Special Bench was challenged by the Department.