9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (6) TMI 843X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ingh, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.K. Das, Member (J) (for the Bench) (Oral)]. After hearing both the sides, we find that the appeal may be decided after granting stay. Hence, appeal is taken up for hearing. 2. The relevant facts of the case, as per the record in brief, are that the appellants were engaged in the manufacturing of vegetable products. They have collected distri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 87. The applicant filed an appeal along with stay application before the Commissioner (Appeals). By stay order dated 19-11-2008, the Commissioner (Appeals) directed the applicant to pre-deposit a sum of Rs. 32 lakhs under section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The applicant filed application for modification of stay order. Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal for non-compliance of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty on merit as well as on limitation. 4. The learned DR submits that the applicant admitted the dues before the Commissioner (Appeals) as revealed from the statement annexed to the show cause notice. He also submits that they have admitted the dues in the submission placed before the Hon ble High Court. He further submits that the applicant already admitted their dues and therefore Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cided by the appellate Commissioner afresh after due notice to the applicant. It appears that the order of High Court was not against present show cause notice. Prima facie, there is no material available of admission of the applicant of the government dues. In any event, in this factual background, we are of the view that it is a fit and proper case to decide the matter on merit without insisting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
