9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 797X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Sukhdev Sharma, Advocate ORDER Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. C.M. No. 21613-CII of 2013 This is an application for condonation of 231 days' delay in filing the appeal. For the reasons mentioned in the application which is supported by an affidavit, the delay of 231 days in filing the appeal is condoned. CM stands disposed of accordingly. CEA No. 95 of 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cie case when the export documents were resumed by the Preventive staff during raid on the premises of the appellant? (iv) Whether the appellant has a prima facie case when the adjudicating authority passed order beyond the Show Cause Notice as the Show Cause Notice did not contain any allegation or discrepancy in the export documents? (v) Whether the Order in Original dated 02.05.2011 is violat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant during the period from 13.3.2007 to 14.5.2007 cleared goods for export manufactured in their factory. A show cause notice dated 7.3.2008 (Annexure P-2) was issued by respondent No.2 proposing to demand duty of Rs. 1,26,05,140/-. The adjudicating authority vide exparte order dated 2.5.2011 (Annexure P-3) confirmed the aforesaid demand of duty a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case was unfair, unreasonable and excessive whereas on the earlier occasion against the liability of Rs. 70 lacs, only Rs. 10 lacs was required to be deposited. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue supported the order passed by the Tribunal. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is considered appropriate that a sum of Rs. 40 lacs be deposited as a condition preced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
