9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (2) TMI 395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agar, DR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - In this case, a demand of Rs. 89,310/- has been confirmed against the appellants in respect of shortage of molasses for the period December, 1999 to January, 2001. Penalties of Rs. 89,310/- and Rs. 25,000/- have also been imposed on the party under Section 11AC and Rule 173Q respectively. 2. Heard both the sides. The Counsel for the appellants subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice and proper adjudication.' Subsequently, the Department issued show cause notice dated 8-1-2002 demanding duty of Rs. 89,310/- on the aforesaid quantity of molasses under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. The notice also proposed to levy interest on the duty under Section 11AB, as also to impose penalty on the party under Section 11AC and Rule 173Q for alleged contravention of Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch demand could be raised without proper adjudication on the remission application. It has been consistently held by this Tribunal that any application for remission of duty under Rule 49 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, should be dealt with by the jurisdictional Commissioner as a quasi-judicial authority. Any such application could not be rejected without giving the applicant an opportunity to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
