9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 372X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e said to have made out a prima facie case against the impugned demand - Decided in favour of assessee by way of remand. - E/1666/2012 - 25005/2013 - Dated:- 11-1-2013 - P G Chacko, J. For the Appellant : Mr M Rajendran, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr Ganesh Haavanur, Additional Commissioner (AR) Per: P G Chacko: On a perusal of the records and hearing both sides, I have found this case fit for summary disposal. Accordingly, after dispensing with predeposit, I take up the appeal. 2. In adjudication of a show-cause notice issued to the assessee, the Deputy Commissioner had confirmed demand of duty of Rs.1,93,047/- against them and appropriated an earlier payment of Rs.2,786/- towards such demand. He had also sought to levy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tipulating that the duty amount be deposited by 19/03/2012. Even that order was passed without personal hearing. That order was received by the party only on 24/03/2012, long after the deadline fixed for predeposit. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) chose to stick to his time schedule and pass a Final order on 20/03/2012 itself without having any occasion to entertain the genuine grievance raised by the party in their modification application. Negation of natural justice is writ large on this set of facts. 4. I have also considered the question whether the appellant can claim prima facie case on merits. They are manufacturers of P or P medicaments (Chapter 30 of the 1 st Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act). A few consignments of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not reviewed in the Department. That order was carried into effect with the destruction of the goods by the assessee. The goods consequently were not available for removal from the factory. Rule 16(2) presupposed a removal of the goods from the factory. Thus the most fundamental question arises as to whether the assessee can be required to pay any amount of duty on the goods. There is no satisfactory answer to this question at this stage and hence the appellant can be said to have made out a prima facie case against the impugned demand. 6. For the above reason, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) shall not require any predeposit. His order is set aside and this appeal is allowed by way of remand with a request for a decision on merits on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
