9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (10) TMI 176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uantum – Tribunal order holding proceedings not extedable beyond shortages recorded in panchnama and reducing duty demand sustainable – no substantial question of law – appeal is dismissed X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fied in the eye of law, in reducing the duty confirmed from Rs. 4,38,104/- to Rs. 3,56,023/-, by considering shortage quantity of 7735.000 Kgs. of the Polyester Texturised Yarn, recorded in the Panchnama, rather than the correct shortage quantity of 9521.700 Kgs. of the Polyester Texturised Yarn, which had been illicitly removed and sold in the open market, on cash-payment by the said Unit? (iii) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisions of 1st & 2nd Proviso to Section 11AC of the said Act or to offer any specific option to any assessee or to advise thereof to the assessee so as to avail the same by such assessee, in the Order-in-Original itself or through any other legitimate manner? (v) Whether the Ld. Tribunal has committed an error in relying upon the decision of CCEC, Rohtak v. M/s. J.R. Fabrics (P) Ltd., wherein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioned on his behalf. We, therefore, proceed to decide the matter on merits. 4. Since this being a finding of fact recorded by both the appellate authorities below, we are of the view that no substantial question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal, in relation to this issue. 5. So far as question Nos. 3 to 6 are concerned, it is in relation to granting an option to deposit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
