9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive question of law warranting admission of these appeals arise X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... et aside the penalty imposed on respondent Nos. 1 and 2 by holding that it was not a case of clandestine removal of goods and there was no corroborative evidence to prove the same. The Commissioner (Appeals) consequently set aside the order to the extent it imposed interest and penalty but it confirmed the amount of duty imposed by the order. It further held that once penalty was imposed on the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. and Another (C.E.A. No. 13 of 2005, decided on 25-7-2006) [2006 (202) E.L.T. 398 (P & H) = 2006 (4) S.T.R. 177 (P & H)]. 5. We have thoughtfully considered the submission made by the learned counsel and have also perused the order-in-original, order-in-appeal and the order passed by the Tribunal. We do not feel persuaded to accept the contention raised because firstly the Commissioner (Appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of CCE v. Machino Montell (P) Ltd., 2004 (168) E.L.T. 466 (Tri. - LB) 2004 (62) RLT 709. Moreover no Show Cause Notice is required under section 11A(2B) inasmuch as the shortage of the finished goods may be due to wrong accounts and clerical mistakes also and it cannot be a case of clandestine removal unless proved by the corroborative evidences. Order-in-Original imposing the interes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
