9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n (Adv.) appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that this issue was earlier remanded by Cestat for proper reconciliation of the duty paid by the appellant as per order No. A/257/WZB/AHD/2011 and S./50/WZB/AHD/2011 dated 31.1.2011 in appeal No. E/419/2009. It was his case that as per Hon'ble Tribunal's directions Adjudicating Authority was asked to make reconciliation of such statements/submissions made by the appellant. Learned Advocate submitted that the appellant is supplying various petroleum products like Motor Spirits, Kerosene, Diesel Oil, Furnace Oil, Fuel Oil etc., though its following four pipe lines: a) Koyali - Ahmedabad Pipeline (KAPL) b) Koyali - Navgam Pipeline (KNPL) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in remand proceedings as per EXB XII of the appeal paper book. 4. It was further argued by the Learned Advocate that inspite of all the details given to the Adjudicating Authority, he failed to appreciate the issue as per CBEC. File No. 21/13/66-CX-III dtd 20.3.1967 and F No. 11A/9/70-CX.9 dated 27.3.1973. It was strongly emphasized that in view of these circulars the loss of one product can be offset against the gain in another product in the annual accounting statements which were reconcilable and condonable. It was further argued that though the earlier order passed by the Adjudicating Authority was remanded by this Bench as per Order dated 31.1.2011 but the Commissioner has again relied upon the findings of the earlier OIO dated 31.2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tements were submitted by the appellant. No specific findings have been given by the Adjudicating Authority on this reconciliation made as to why reconciliation made by the appellant are not acceptable. It is also observed from the findings in Para 12, 13.3, 13.4 and 13.6 of the impugned OIO dated 8.12.2012 that Adjudicating Authority has simply relied upon the earlier findings in adjudication order dtd 31.12.2008 which was set aide by the order dtd 31.1.2011 passed by this Bench. It is improper to rely upon the findings of an adjudicating order which is no more existing. We are left with no other alternative but to set aside the OIO dtd 18.12.2012 passed by the Adjudicating Authority and remand the matter to him with a direction to pass an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
