9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 453X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order]. Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of DG sets. The business as well as residence premises of the appellants were searched by the Revenue officers and during investigation it was found that the appellants we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant. The source of procurement of invoices has not been disclosed and the signature on the invoices are denied by the appellant. In these circumstances, the demand is not sustainable. 5. In respect of the penalties, the contention is that the provisions of Rule 173Q were invoked without specifying the particular clause of Rule 173Q had been allegedly contravened the provisions by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f duty. Investigation was also conducted from the transporter regarding transportation of the goods manufactured by the appellant which clearly shows that the goods manufactured by the appellants were transported under particular GRs and there is no corresponding entry in the statutory record regarding the clearance of goods. In respect of the penalties, the contention is that Shri Mohan Singh was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner (Appeals ) order, it is not specified which particular clause or Rule 173Q of Rules have been allegedly contravened by the appellant. On this ground, the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Amrit Foods (supra) set aside the penalty. In view of the above decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court, the penalty imposed under Rule 173Q is set aside. The appellant cleared the goods without pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
