Supreme Court · 2010 INSC 775 · Decided 12 November 2010
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad v. M/S. Bajaj Auto LTD., Waluj, Aurangabad, Through Its Vice President (Materials) and ORS.
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Citation
- 2010 INSC 775 · [2010] 14 S.C.R. 184
- Case number
- CIVIL APPEAL No. 3860/2006
- Decided
- 12 November 2010
- Bench
- D.K. JAIN, H.L. DATTU (2-judge bench)
- Outcome
- Appeal(s) allowed
- Case type
- Civil
- Acts & sections cited
- Central Excise Act Section 11A
Headnote
Central Excise Act, 1944: s.11A, proviso - Recovery of duty short paid - Invocation of the proviso - Held: Proviso to s. 11 A can be invoked when there is a conscious act of either fraud, collusion, wilful or D contravention of the provisions of the Act or any of the rules made thereunder on the part of the assessee, with the intent to evade payment of duty - Since the proviso extends the period of limitation from six months to five years, it needs to be construed strictly - The initial burden is
Judgments are the courts' own published copies, provided for study; they are not certified copies. Source: Indian Supreme Court & High Court Judgments, Dattam Labs (CC-BY-4.0)