9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (3) TMI 457X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, ordered confiscation of plant and machinery allowing redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 2 Crores. We are not concerned in this stay application with the rest of the order which affects the Directors and employee of the appellant as also another concern. 2. Two main allegations against the appellants are of clandestine removal of substantial number of manufactured goods, namely, stainless steel sheets, tor rods and bars and undervaluation of stainless steel sheets in the guise of they being other alloy sheets. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted at the outset that he does not propose to make any submission on merits but is seeking relief under Section 35F of the Act on the ground that the adjudicating authority has grossly vio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellants were busy with the audit work and the like. 4. According to the learned Counsel for the appellant, appellants staff went to the Superintendent s office with photocopying machines and started taking copies of relevant documents. Since the documents were voluminous the work could not proceed substantially. Therefore, on 22-10-1997, appellants Counsel made a request for more time to take copies of all the documents and for postponement of personal hearing to February, 1998. On 24-10-1997 the Superintendent informed the appellant that personal hearing would take place on 3-11-1997 and copies should be obtained and reply submitted before that date. On 29-10-1997, the appellant informed the Commissioner that all the relied upon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied upon by the Department. The list contained 373 documents, of which more than 71 are registers, 25 are entry slip books running into thousands of pages, 37 files containing a few thousand pages. In the light of these materials it is not possible to accept at this stage the contention of Shri Sharma, CDR that the appellant was interested only in delaying the proceedings and for that purpose had put forward the excuse that it was necessary to examine the documents. This is particularly so since the show cause notice did not refer to the particular pages in the files or registers which were sought to be relied upon. It appears prima facie that it was necessary for the appellant to obtain copies of all the documents and examine what material ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
