9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, we are constrained to remand the matter at this stage so that the issues are considered afresh and submissions made are discussed and conclusions arrived in accordance with law. After going through the various demands that have been confirmed, we find that prima facie, the appellants did not have a case in respect of an amount of ₹ 3.6 lakhs - Appeal disposed of. - ST/825/2011-DB - Fina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the matter. 2.1 As submitted by learned counsel for the appellants, we find that in this case, the submissions have not been considered in a proper perspective by the Commissioner and there is a mechanical reproduction of the submission but conclusion is basically what was proposed in show-cause notice. The first example emerges from the fact that while confirming the demand of more than ͅ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ticular month has been taken as ₹ 3.54 crores but the actual amount is only less than ₹ 40 lakhs. There is absolutely no observations on this issue. 3. Thus, we find that in confirmation of demand of more than ₹ 16.06 crores, in respect of the substantial portion, the submissions made by the appellants have not been considered in detail and in a proper prospective. Therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s from today and report compliance to the Commissioner who after taking note of the compliance, proceed to adjudicate the matter afresh after giving reasonable opportunity to the appellants to present their case. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on any of the issues discussed above. (Operative portion of the order has been pronounced in open Court) - - TaxTMI - TMITax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
