2004 (5) TMI 370

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J) (Oral)]. For the purpose of hearing the appeal, the appellant is required to pre-deposit penalty of Rs. 15,20,319/- under Rule 96ZO(1). The appellants were confirmed with duty amount in terms of Order-in-Appeal Nos. 324-325/2003-C.E., dated 11-12-2003. The matter pertaining to imposition of penalty has been kept pending. After the disposal of the m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o them to challenge that, in this appeal. 4. On a careful consideration, we find force in the DR s submission. The aspect pertaining to provisionality of assessment has to be raised in the proceedings where demands were confirmed in Order-in-Appeal Nos. 324-325/2003-C.E., dated 11-12-2003. It is too late in the day to raise this ground in the appeal. This matter pertains only to imposition of pe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X