9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 862X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial) And Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Technical Member For the Petitioner : Shri Sudhir Malhotra and Shri A.S.Hasija, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Ranjan Khanna, DR ORDER Per Archana Wadhwa: Both the stay petitions are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order passed by the Commissioner vide which he confirmed the demand of duty of Rs. 98 croes approximately ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said factory. However, the present factory located at T-1/110, Mangolpuri, Industrial Area was found to be having stock of footwear on which no MRP was embossed or affixed. Statement of Shri Dharamendra Singh, the appellant's employee was taken. On the reasonable belief that the appellant were wrongly availing the benefit of the notification in question, the goods were seized. During the post-s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot working. On the above basis, they contended that it cannot be presumed that the footwears manufactured by them were not entitled for the entire previous period and the demand for the period Jan. 2011 to March, 2013 cannot be confirmed. 6. The Commissioner considered all the above submissions of the appellant. In fact, he came to a categorical finding that the MRP of the footwears being manufac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as reproduced in the impugned order-in-original, that the said two deponents have also not admitted that the past-clearance of the footwears was without marking the same with the MRP. In the absence of any such admission by any of the persons and in absence of any further investigations, from the buyers of the appellant, the reasoning of the Revenue that all the previous clearances were without t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
