9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 640X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of the CESTAT and hence this Appeal is accordingly dismissed. - Tax Appeal No. 1762 of 2009, - - - Dated:- 27-11-2009 - K.A. Puj and Rajesh H. Shukla, JJ. Shri Paresh V. Sheth, Advocate, for the Appellant. [Order per : K.A. Puj, J. (Oral)]. The Appellant has filed this Tax Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, proposing to formulate the following substantial questions of law for determination and consideration of this Court : (i) Whether the Hon. CESTAT, Ahmedabad is correct in confirming the demand on the ground that the appellant did not contest the duty confirmation before the Honourable Commissioner (A)? (ii) Whether the Honourable CESTAT, Ahmedabad is correct in confirming part of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Central Excise Department has filed an Appeal before the CESTAT, the Appellant-assessee filed cross-objections challenging the duty demand. The CESTAT has disposed of the Appeal filed by the Central Excise Department. However, no order was passed on cross-objection and hence the rectification application was moved by the Appellant-assessee. The said rectification application was decided by the CESTAT on 5-5-2005, wherein it is observed that it is seen from the record that the Appellants did not contest the duty confirmation before the Commissioner (Appeals). Their only prayer was to set aside the penalty, while admitting such clandestine removal and confirmation of demand of duty. The CESTAT was therefore of the view that the Appellants a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Advocate appearing for the Appellant and having gone through the orders passed by the authorities below, we are of the view that the Appellant was seriously challenging or contesting only the penalty as the duty has already been paid by the Appellant even before issuance of show-cause notice. Before the Commissioner (Appeals) also no serious objection was raised by the Appellant and even the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly observed in his order that the clandestine removal was admitted by the Appellant in the statement. Based on these observations made by the Commissioner (Appeals), the CESTAT while disposing of the rectification application has observed that it is not open for the Appellant to contend before the CESTAT that the duty d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
