9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 61X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Siddharth Shukla, Advocate for respondents. 2. The petitioner claimed rebate of Central Excise Duty on alleged export of certain goods. The Assistant Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise, Agra (hereinafter referred to as the "A.C., C.C.E.") issued show cause notice dated 11.11.2005 stating that on scrutiny of petitioner's rebate claim i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the same and, therefore, it also dismissed appeal vide order dated 29.08.2006 and confirmed the order of A.C., C.C.E. and petitioner's revision has also been rejected vide order dated 05.06.2009. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the grounds mentioned in show cause notice have been widened in passing the impugned orders and his claim has been rejected on certain grounds n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner could not give any explanation in this regard. Similarly, for the purpose of difference of weights, the details have been discussed in the order of A.C., C.C.E. and petitioner got opportunity even before Appellate Authority but could not explain the same satisfactorily. The difference could not be explained even before this Court. 6. Mismatch of goods mentioned in invoices and AREs is o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with aforesaid findings of facts. 8. Coming to the decisions cited at Bar on behalf of petitioner, I find that in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh Vs. M/s Shital International (supra) the court found that notice issued to assessee-company did not mention any of the ingredients required to substantiate the charge which may justify rejection of his stand and levy of CENVAT and other duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
