9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 337X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i, Member (T),JJ. For the Appellants : Mr S Jayakumar, Adv. for appellant No. 2 & 3, Mr N Manickam, Adv. for appellant No. 1 For the Respondent : Mr B Balamurugan, AC (AR) ORDER Per: D N Panda: Ld. Counsel Shri S. Jayakumar, submits that there is a gross violation of principles of natural justice depriving the appellants from getting copies of the documents which were relied upon by ld. Adju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the letter dated 12.11.13 of the authority (copies thereof appears at page 244 of the paper book), it made further representation by communication dated 05.02.14 to the Authority to provide respective documents. The copy of the said communication appears at page 269 of the appeal folder. By that time, the appellants have already relied to the show cause notice. 3. Ld. Counsel further submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d also manufacturers the same by the job workers. So also it job worked the goods. Therefore, three types of activities of the appellant deserved consideration vis-à-vis the materials gathered in the course of investigation. But, that was not done. In some cases, the estimated slip were considered to be invoices without due regard to the submissions of the appellant as to the nature thereof ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmitted that the penalty imposed on him under Rule 26 (1) of Central Excise Rules is unwarranted since he was a mere supplier of inputs and not dealt with any excisable goods. 7. Revenue supports adjudication. 8. Heard both sides and perused the records. 9. The facts stated by Ld. Counsel on behalf of M/s. Maruthi Ploybags Pvt. Ltd., although prima facie convinces to certain extent to apprecia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
