L.D. Textiles Industries Ltd. vs Commissioner Of C. Ex. on 7 March, 2007
Further, we also notice that the appellant are manufacturers of Fibres of PSF and viscose and are also manufacturing blended yarn made from polyester waste and viscose (Para 31 in impugned Order). It may be possible that the sample drawn , by the Revenue authorities of the inputs may be of fresh polyester staple fibre which was being used by the appellant in the manufacturing of blended fibre made out of PSF and viscose. It is on record that the appellant had purchased polyester waste (47% of their requirement) from MPPL who were subjected to investigation on the ground that they were supplying PSF in the guise of polyester waste. The said case has ended in favour of that assessee as held by the Tribunal in the case of Reliance Industries & Ors. (supra). There is nothing on record to show that the authorities have investigated other suppliers of polyester waste to the appellant. We also find merits in the arguments of the learned advocate that the show cause notice issued on 9-7-1996 is blatantly time barred as during the relevant period show cause notice had to be issued within 6 months and extended period can be invoked, if there were suppression, mis-statement with intention to evade payment of duty. It is on record during the period April, 92 to December, 94 the appellants were issued various show cause notices on this very same issue and adjudication orders were passed in their favour. Hence show cause notice dated 9-7-96 covering the extended period would be hit by limitation.