9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1216X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eding drawn under panchnama - The officer alongwith witness at the request of the officer accompanied to the residence of the director of the company - he was not found in his residence premises, the order was pasted at the main door of his residence – assessees have not been able to show any reason to doubt the correctness or authenticity of panchnama – there was no merits in assessee’s prayer for cross examination of witnesses or inspector - the order was served upon the appellant on 15.7.2006, in which case the appeal filed on 12.1.2011 would be barred by limitation – Thus, the application for condonation of delay rejected Decided against Assessee. - Appeal No.E/483/2011 - FINAL ORDER NO.57716/2013 - Dated:- 10-9-2013 - Mrs. Archana ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aborating his argument, he submits that though the impugned order was passed on 12.4.2006 but the same was not received by the appellant, as their factory was lying closed since 2005 onwards. He submits that subsequently the said factory was taken over by the new management. When the Revenue approached them for recovering the dues, they came to know about the impugned order of the Commissioner(Appeals) vide which he has allowed the Revenue s appeal. He submits that even the appellant was not aware of filing of appeal by the Revenue before the Commissioner (Appeals), as is clear from the above observation of the appellate authority that the assessee did not cause any appearance before him on three dates of personal hearing. As such, he submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LOSED; letter dt.21.4.2006 of the Supdt. (Appeals)-II), Jaipur , Panchnama dt.15.7.2006 is enclosed for ready reference and placing before the Hon ble CESTAT for perusal. 5. In view of the above Panchnama Proceedings, the provisions of Section 37C (1) (b) of Central Excise Act, 1944 stand fully complied with and therefore in terms of Section 37C (2) of the Act ibid, the said OIA should be deemed to have been served on the appellant unit on 15.7.2006. 7. As such, Ld.DR submits that in view of the above, Panchnama Proceedings, the provisions of Section 37C (1) (b) of Central Excise Act, 1944 stand fully complied with and therefore in terms of Section 37C (2) of the Act ibid, the said OIA should be deemed to have been served on the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the factory was lying close, there was no responsible person available in the factory as per proceeding drawn under panchnama. The officer alongwith witness at the request of the officer accompanied to the residence of Shri P.C.Bohra who was the director of the company. As Shri P.C. Bohra was not found in his residence premises, the order was pasted at the main door of his residence B-78, Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara. Panchnama also recorded that the said proceedings were concluded between 11 am to 11.30 am. The said panchnama bears the signature of the inspector as also of two witnesses on the last page of the panchnama as also to the first page of the panchnama. This fact shows that panchnama drawn was in accordance with law and reflected the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
