2014 (12) TMI 122

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ference of this Court. The claim made by the petitioner before the Commissioner (Appeals) has not been substantiated so far. The documents in support of the claim are yet to be co-related to the duty which might have been paid by the petitioner’s corporate office, transporter or vendor. The aforesaid documents are yet to be produced before the Appellate Authority. There is no document on the recor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ₹ 33,50,954/- and ordered the recovery from the petitioner under Section 73 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for brevity the Act ) by invoking extended period of limitation. It was further directed that interest at the appropriate rate under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 2008 be also recovered and penalty of equivalent amount of demand of service tax was imposed under Section 78 of the Act .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Adjudicating Authority was stayed. 3. We have heard learned counsel at some length and are of the view that the discretion exercised by the appellate authority in passing the inter-locutory order does not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting interference of this Court. The claim made by the petitioner before the Commissioner (Appeals) has not been substantiated so far. The documents in su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X