2006 (12) TMI 304

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the facility for fortnightly payment of duty was withdrawn on the ground that the appellant failed to deposit duty on the due date more than thrice. 3. The contention of the appellants is that two show-cause notices were issued to the appellant for forfeiture of fo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 3. The contention is that, therefore, there is no default on the part of the appellant regarding payment of duty on due date, in these two cases and if explanation given by the appellant is accepted than for remaining default, facility cannot be withdrawn. 4. The contention is also that the adjudicating authority accepted their contention, however, the Commissioner of Central Excise reviewed the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d in their records only on 2-4-2003 this is evident from the certificate given by the bank. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the appellant default in payment of their fortnightly payment of duty and Commissioner s finding also regarding these payments are not sustainable. As the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the adjudicating authority has condoned the delay in payment of duty, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X