9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 647X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eme Court and was remanded to the Tribunal. The Tribunal, held against the respondent claim for exemption. During the pendency of these proceedings periodically notices were issued to the respondent as a protective measure. It is seen that such notices were challenged by way of writ-petition No. 14034/2010 before the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court who quashed the notices in their order dated 06/12/10 as during the period the petitioner had a favourable order on merit regarding the exemption of the goods. Against this order, the Revenue moved Hon’ble Supreme Court in civil writ-petition No.14181/2015 which is still pending and no details of stay or interim order has been brought to our notice. Considering that substantial portion of de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aceutical products. The case was adjudicated resulting in impugned order. The Commissioner in his order dated 21/11/2005 dropped the demand made in the show cause notice. The Revenue is aggrieved by this order and filed these appeals. 2. The learned AR submitted that the case against the main respondent is mainly on account of unaccounted manufacture and clearance of various pharmaceutical products. The investigation brought out by various private records, statements of concerned persons, the unaccounted clearance of excisable goods. The Revenue mainly contested the findings on the ground that the Commissioner did not give due weightage to the private records resumed during investigation and corroborated by various statements. One of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty on I.V. fluids it is the case of the respondent that they have been providing details regularly to the Department based on which periodical show cause notices have been issued to deny exemption and, hence, the impugned order is correctly holding that the demand ₹ 28,97,641/- cannot be maintained for extended period. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. We find that in the present proceedings the demand originally raised against the main respondent is mainly on the basis of unaccounted manufacture and clearance of dutiable pharmaceutical products. Reliance was placed on various private records and statements recorded during investigation by the officers. This was found to be not corroborated sufficien ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
