9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 530X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appear on the pretext of some urgent work. Another reason to justify to extend the period of issue of show cause notice is that the investigation could not be completed due to non cooperation by the appellant. Infirmity in the impugned order which may call for interference by the Tribunal, particularly when, the learned Counsel for the appellant could not explain the source of confiscated goods, Indian currency recovered from the appellants in answer to our query. The fact, that the appellants have not come forward to explain the source of the seized goods and the Indian currency is clear indication of non cooperation by the appellant. In view of the above, it is prima facie evident that further investigation is required to verify wheth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reasonable belief that the those goods were manufactured and kept by the appellant in contravention of the provisions of Central Excise Act for clandestine clearance. Besides those goods, a computer belonging to the appellant s firm was also seized. On the same day, search was conducted at the residential premises of the partners of the appellant house no. 345, Sector 17, Faridabad which resulted in recovery and seizure of Indian currency of Rs. 3,75,64,500/- which the appellant could not account for. The said cash was also seized on the reasonable belief that it was the sale proceeds of excisable goods cleared without payment of duty. Similarly, on 13-9-2011, a sum of Rs. 14,98,000/-, gold jewellery and gold ginni weighing 1570 gms were s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ause notice may not be extended by another six months. The appellant contested the notice but the Commissioner vide order dated 5-3-2012 extended the stipulated period of six months by another six months in terms of above referred proviso to clause (2) of Section 110 of Customs Act, 1962. 7. Shri Abhishek Pareek, learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that the impugned order is not sustainable in law because the Commissioner has arbitrarily invoked the proviso to Section 110(2) of Customs Act, 1962 without actually considering whether sufficient cause existed for extending the period of issue notice by six months. It is also submitted that the impugned order is non-speaking and it does not address the written submission of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned Authorised Representative for the respondent on the contrary has argued in support of the impugned order. He has reiterated the line of reasoning adopted by the Commissioner for extension of period of limitation. 9. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the records. 10. The main question to be answered in these appeals is whether or not there was sufficient cause for extending the period of issue of show cause notice as contemplated by the proviso to clause (2) of Section 110 of Customs Act, 1962. Perusal of the show cause notice dated 28-2-2012 for extending of time of show cause notice would show reason given for the proposed extension of period of Show cause notice was that the data from the CPU seized from th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
