9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 22X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TY, A.R.( ASSTT. COMMR.) JUDGEMENT Two separate Appeals have been filed by the Appellant against the Order-in-Appeal Nos.102/KOL-III/2011 dated 09.03.2011 and 240-241/KOL-III/2011 dated 11.08.2011, respectively, both passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). 2. Ld. Consultant appearing for the Appellant submits that vide Order-in-Original No.15/Demand/DD-I/09-10 dated 25.03.2010, a de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ayment of redemption fine of Rs.50,000/-, confirmed the demand of Rs.19,433/- and reduced the penalty from Rs.3.00 lakh to Rs.50,000/-. It is the contention that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in his another Order-in-Appeal No.240-241/KOL-III/2011 dated 11.08.2011 in appeal filed by the assessee against the same Order-in-Original upheld the Order-in-Original(cited supra). Both the Orders-in-Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 09.03.2011 without hearing the assessee and without issuance of any show cause notice to them, before modifying the Order-in-Original dated 25.03.2010. 3. Ld. AR for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals), so far as they relate to confirmation of duty. However, he fairly concedes to the submission of the ld. Consultant that the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of Rs.3.00 lakh on the Appellant in terms of the erstwhile Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules and appropriated the amount of Security Deposit of Rs.1,10,980/-. An appeal was filed by the Department against the Order-in-Original No.15/Demand/DD-I/09-10 dated 25.03.2010. The Commissioner (Appeals) modified the Order of the Adjudicating Authority to the extent that the Commissioner (Appeals) all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed without observing the principles of natural justice. In these circumstances, the Orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) are bad in law. The same are set aside. I, therefore, remit both the matters to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the case afresh, after taking into consideration various pleas put by the Appellant in respect of both the Orders-in-Appeal, and after giving a proper opp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
