9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (6) TMI 99X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. [Order per : K.S. Venkataramani, Member (T)]. This is an application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 31,20,773.43 and penalty of Rs. 15,00,000/- imposed on the applicant by the Collector of Central Excise, North U.P., Meerut in the impugned order dated 13-1-1995. 2. On hearing Shri K.L. Rekhi, the learned Consultant and Shri Prabhat Kumar, learned SDR, we find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also gave them an opportunity for personal hearing. Thereafter, the Collector made certain enquiry with the Sales Tax Department which revealed that no khandsari units in the neighbourhood had ever sold any bagasse during the period July, 1987 to March, 1992 as reported by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax to the Collector. The adjudicating authority made this the basis to conclude that the ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er as explained in their reply to the show cause notice. The ld. Consultant stated that the Collector apparently found that their reply was well founded and the total change of the basis of the case in the adjudication order making use of the Sales Tax Department report was only to salvage the Deptt. s case. In fact, it was only subsequent to the receipt of the adjudication order, the ld. Counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y considered the submissions made by both sides. We are satisfied that there is violation of the principles of natural justice in this case. The basis on which the Collector has given his findings against the appellants for demanding duty and imposing penalty on them is totally different from what is set out in the show cause notice. In such context, the appellants plea that they have never recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
