9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1056X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal in Anna Petrochem Pvt. Ltd. (2009 (5) TMI 716 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI) and Jay Kay Synthetics (2001 (9) TMI 208 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI ) held that show cause notice/personal hearing is required before such appropriation. In Voltas Ltd. [2006 (5) TMI 232 - CESTAT, BANGALORE ], the Tribunal examined the scope and applicability of Section 11. It was held that sums due to Government become arrears only after finality is reached on such demand. The Appellate Authority also confirmed such appropriation without examining the legality of action of recovery proceedings. However, as shown now by the appellant, none of the confirmed demands survive as on date. This being not disputed by Revenue also. In any case, in view of non-existence of any confirme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , is legally untenable. Further, he submitted, in any case, all the three confirmed demands are not any more existing as they were either set aside or sent for fresh adjudication. Elaborating further, on the status of each confirmed demand, ld. Counsel stated that the order-in-original no.126 dated 31.01.2013 and order-in-appeal dated 24.12.2013, on such original order was set aside by the Tribunal vide Final Order No.53527-53529 of 2015 dated 20.11.2015 ; order-in-original no.129 dated 31.01.2013; order-in-appeal dated 24.12.2013 on such original order was set aside by the Tribunal vide Final Orders No.54511-54513 of 2014 dated 20.11.2014 and the matter was remanded back to the Original Authority for a fresh consideration; order-in-origina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9) STR 591, the Tribunal examined the scope and applicability of Section 11. It was held that sums due to Government become arrears only after finality is reached on such demand. The Appellate Authority also confirmed such appropriation without examining the legality of action of recovery proceedings. However, as shown now by the appellant, none of the confirmed demands survive as on date. This being not disputed by Revenue also. 8. Ld. AR was specifically asked regarding status of such appropriation in the changed circumstances of the fact. He simply reiterated that the original appropriation was made correctly. The appellant is aggrieved against such appropriation. In any case, in view of non-existence of any confirmed demand as on dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
