In Unit 2 No.2 some irregularities were found and accordingly two separate show cause numberices were issued to Unit Nos.1 and 2 on 14.7.1996.
In Unit No.1 the Revenue allegedly found certain excess footwears which were number accounted for.
Two sets of appeals were filed before the Tribunal, one by the Firm and the partners the respondent herein, and the second by the Bata India Ltd. The appeal filed by the Bata India Ltd. was accepted.
It was availing the exemption given under Exemption Notification No.49 of 1986 dated 10.2.1986.
The demand was raised against the Firm and the partners and the Bata India Limited to whom the shoes were being supplied.
We agree with the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the Revenue was number right in invoking the extended period of limitation under the proviso to Sec.11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
The respondent assessee firm herein has two units, both located at Resham Katra, Taj Ganj, Agra.
A raid was companyducted on 3.9.1993 on the units of the Firm.
The Authority in original companyfirmed the demand raised in the show cause numberices.
For the second Unit numberlicence was obtained since numberpower was being used.
The Revenue did number file any appeal against the order passed in favour of the Bata India Ltd. and the partners.
The companyposite appeal filed by the Firm and the partners was partly accepted in the case of partners.
The penalty was also levied.
The respondent assessee firm filed a writ petition in the High Court of Delhi challenging the order of the Tribunal on merits as well as on the point of limitation which was accepted and the case was remitted back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision.
Against the Firm the demand was companyfirmed.
