9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (3) TMI 241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Appellant. Shri S. Sachdeva, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. For reasons recorded below, we waive the requirement of pre-deposit and stay recovery of the adjudged amount of duty and penalty and proceed to take up the appeal itself with the consent of both sides. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicants are engaged in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chased from the open market, was negatived by the adjudicating authority on the ground that consignees from whom the inputs were purchased were not licensed and the vouchers do not contain any particulars of payment of duty, and confirmed the demand and imposed a penalty of Rs. 25,000/-. 3. The Collector (Appeals) rejected the appellants application for stay and, by Stay Order No. 12, dated 13- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... because the appellant has failed to comply with the condition of pre-deposit. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Collector (Appeals) for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. The appellants are at liberty to move a fresh stay application before the lower appellate authority who shall extend an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants before pass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
