9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve produced Transport company's GR and as such no inquiry has been conducted with the transporter. Moreover, there was a consignment of Kaftans available in the factory which appeared to be covered by the export invoice. In view of these circumstances, I hold that the duty cannot be demanded. Only lapse of the appellant is that he did not intimate to the department in time which cannot lead to demand of duty. - impugned order is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - Excise Appeal No. 58443 of 2013-Ex (SM) - ORDER NO. FO/52014/2015-Ex(SM) - Dated:- 23-6-2015 - Shri Ashok, J. For The Appellant : Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri B B Sharma, AR Per Ashok Jindal : The appellant are manufact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 1,09,848/- alongwith interest and imposition of penalty, alleging that the goods cleared under ARE-1 was illicitly diverted. The Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 17/10/12 confirmed the above-mentioned duty demand alongwith interest and imposed penalty of equal amount. This order of the Assistant Commissioner was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dated 28/2/13 against which this appeal has been filed. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate, the learned Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that the goods cleared under ARE-1 No. 30/2011-12 dated 10/05/2011 had been inspected by the representatives of the overseas buyers and had been rejected as the quality of the go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duce the original and duplicate copies of the ARE-1 under which the goods had been cleared for export, that there are discrepancies in the documents original and duplicate copies of the ARE-1 produced by them, that the Range Officer has also not certified that the goods available in the appellant's factory are same as ones which had been cleared under ARE-1 return No. 30/2011-2012 and that in view of these circumstances, the duty demand has been correctly confirmed. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. 6. The goods, in question, had been cleared on 10/5/11 under ARE-1 No. 30/2011-2012 for export under bond. According to the appellant these goods could not be exported, as the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
