2004 (4) TMI 396

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... None, for the Respondent. [Order]. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal. 2. As per facts on record the respondent is manufactured man made fabrics falling under Chapter 54 and 55 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1944. On 14-2-1997, the Central Excise officers intercepted one tempo, which was found to be loaded with p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The proprietor of the said firm Shri K.K. Agarwal in his statement admitted the clandestine removal but submitted that they are the same goods which have earlier been seized by the Revenue and for which the orders have been passed and they have paid the duty. The Assistant Commissioner while adjudicating the case did not accept the above stand and confirmed the demand of duty alongwith imposition .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppeals) is impugned before me by the Revenue. 4. After hearing Shri A.K. Saxena, learned J.D.R. for the Revenue and after going through the memorandum of the appeal, I find that the Revenues contention is that the statement of Shri Agarwal clearly accepted the clandestine removal of the goods under the parallel invoices in question and reliance on the second statement of Shri Agarwal which is to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X