2016 (10) TMI 453

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion in the MRP on importation. Therefore, there was no loss to revenue. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with impugned order. - Decided against the Revenue
Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) and Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Ashok B. Kulgod, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for Appellant Shri Atul Gupta, Advocate & Shri Hrishikesh, Advocate, for Respondent ORDER Present appeal is filed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida against Order-in-Appeal No. 108/CE/APPL/NOIDA/05 dated 28/10/2005. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent was functioning from a godown and was dealing with different products such as Audio Compact Disc, Recorded Video Compact Disc, Blank Audio Cassettes of TDK .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e respondents were issued with a show cause notice dated 29.06.2004 proposing confiscation of seized goods with a proposal to impose penalty on them. The said show cause notice was adjudicated through Order-in-Original No.10/ADDL.COMMR/NOIDA/2005 dated 20.05.2005. Through the said order seized goods were confiscated and redemption fine of ₹ 20 Lakhs was imposed. Further, the penalty of ₹ 5 Lakhs was imposed on respondent under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 3. Aggrieved by the said order dated 20/05/2005 respondent preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Original authority had taken on record that the respondent filed an application on 19.02.2004 stating that the respondents have paid Central Excise D .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... et aside the said order-in-Original dated 20.05.2005. 4. Aggrieved by the impugned order Revenue is in appeal before us. The ground inter-alia for filing appeal before us is that the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has failed to appreciate the fact that the acceptance of deposit made under Section 11A (2B) ibid was granted in respect of goods already removed during the period from 01.03.2003 to 30.06.2003, duty voluntarily deposited amounting to ₹ 1,01,56,647/- and interest of ₹ 83,160/- is not the subject, matter of show cause notice and it has no relation with the instant case and that Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has further observed that before granting extension a show cause notice should have been issued and personal hea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X