9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (10) TMI 1096X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mers. Some goods are transferred to their own depots on payment of duty on the basis of stock transfer invoices. The prices at which such goods were sold from the depots varied and were not the same at the prices at which the goods were cleared from the factory on payment of duty. 3. 16 show cause notices were issued covering the period. The allegations were identical. It was claimed that the prices at which the goods were transferred to their own depots were lower than the prices at which goods were sold to outside. It was also alleged that different prices were charged for the same goods from the same buyers and the same phenomenon had recurred in Ex-depot sales also. It was claimed that such sales at differential prices were made w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... His finding on facts were also challenged. 5. In his impugned order the Commissioner listed various grounds raised before him in the review application. He observed that the grounds raised in the show cause notice were not covered by the Assistant Commissioner. He referred to the amendment to Section 4, dated 28-9-1996. He referred to and relied upon Tribunal's order reproduced in, 2000 (122) E.L.T. 171 (Tribunal) in the case of Camphor & Allied Products Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise. He observed that the Assistant Commissioner order was unsustainable. He remanded the issue back to the adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication directing him to keep in mind his observation and to pass fresh order as per the law. 6.&ems ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts of the case that judgment may not have any application. 9. On perusal of the various facts and the arguments made before us. We observe that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has failed to appreciate the issue placed before him. What was required of him was to take each point made in the review application and to examine it in the eye of the law. It was not for him to adopt as prima facie correct each argument placed therein and on that basis to pass the entire issue back to the Assistant Commissioner for adjudication de novo. 10. In this conviction we set aside the orders passed by him and remand the proceedings back to the Commissioner (Appeals) with the directions that he shall go into the issues as discussed by us above; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
