- (1.) The correctness of the order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore (in short the CESTAT') dated 20-12-2006 in Appeal No. Excise/261/2006 is questioned in this appeal urging various grounds. In support of the appeal, questions of law are framed in I.A. 1/08 and prayed to set aside the said order by allowing this appeal. "1. Whether the Tribunal right in holding that show cause notice issued belatedly when there is a suppression of facts and same was detected on 25-10-1996 but subsequently issued the show-cause notice.
(2.) Whether the Tribunal right in holding that the Asst. Commissioner has not taken permission from the Commissioner to invoke the proviso to Section 11A of the Act?" 2 The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue contended that, the decision of the Apex Court in Nizam Sugars V/s. Commissioner of Central Excise Hyderabad, 2006 197 ELT 465 in which case the appeal was allowed on the ground that appeal is barred by limitation.
(3.) The said decision has no application to the facts of the case on hand as the Tribunal ought to have taken into consideration fact that the action was taken by the Department by issuing first and second show-cause notices to the assessee on the alleged suppression of the facts and the Department had detected the case on 25-10-1996 and the show-cause notice was issued on 26-6-2000 to the assessce which is well within the time prescribed in the Act. Therefore, he contended that the decision in Nizam's case statedhas no application to the facts of the case. Further, the learned counsel for the Revenue placed strong reliance upon the decision in the case of M/s. Modipon Fibre Co ., Modinagar UP V/s. Commissioner of Central Excise , Meerut, 2007 AIR(SCW) 6819 .;