9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 30X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be sustained and the same is set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/1520/2010 - A/60364/2017-SM[BR] - Dated:- 20-2-2017 - Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical) Shri S. J. Singh, Advocate for the Appellant(s) Shri G.M. Sharma, A.R. for the Respondent(s) Per : Devender Singh The appellants are in appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No.24/CE/Appl/DLH-IV/2010 dated 16.03.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Delhi-I, Faridabad. 2.1 Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a manufacture-exporter. The appellant had filed a B-1 Bond on 29.06.2009 for ₹ 5,00,000/- for removal of excisable goods without payment of duty to a unit or developer of SEZ and claimed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order of the Adjudicating Authority on the ground that in the instant case the appellant had come to the adverse notice of the department on account of excess un-accounted material valued at ₹ 27,72,704/-, therefore, the Adjudicating Authority was within his right to direct the appellants to furnish surety or bank guarantee of 25% of the bond amount. Against the said order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the appellants have filed this appeal. 3. Ld. Advocate for the appellants submits that the Circular dated 31.12.1996 is not longer valid as has been clarified in the Circular No.586/23/2001-CX dated 12.09.2001 (para 2). He also argued that the Circular dated 30.04.2003 mentioned in the show cause notice is only applicable to me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g to the above amount of ₹ 27,72,704/- was adjudicated and the demand was confirmed by Order-in-Original dated 30.09.2009. The appeal of the party against the same was disposed of vide Order-in-Appeal (O-I-A) No.73/CE/Appl/DLH-IV/2010 dated 11.06.2010. The appellants filed an appeal (Appeal No.E/2904/2010) before Hon ble CESTAT against Order-in-Appeal dated 11.06.2010 and the appeal was allowed by Hon ble CESTAT vide Final Order No.A/50231/2014-SM[BR] dated 24.01.2014. 6.2 Since the sole proceeding on which adjudicating authority and Commissioner (Appeals) have relied for withdrawing the B-1 Bond dated 21.04.2006 has been set aside, the order of Commissioner (Appeals) in that background cannot be sustained and the same is set aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
