9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both the authorities below have not addressed the issue by analyzing the said evidences - these ledgers, invoices, LRs need to be examined and specific finding on these evidences ought to be recorded by the adjudicating authority - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Central Excise Appeal No.1797, 1798 of 2010-SM - A/12863-12864/2017 - Dated:- 9-10-2017 - Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial) Present Shri P.V. Sheth, Advocate for the Appellants Present Shri Sameer Chitkara, A.R. for the Respondent-Revenue ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra Heard both sides. These two appeals are filed against Order-in-Appeal No.390 to 400/2010/COMMR(A)/CMC/RAJ passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Rajkot. 2. Briefly stated the facts o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I to the show cause notice, could be answered by reconciling the documents. In support of his contention, the ld. Advocate referred to one of the invoice referred to at serial No.20 of Annexure-I to SCN on duty calculation for the month of August 2008, stating that it was issued by M/s Harsh Ceramics Ltd., invoice no.70 dt.09.7.2008 (page 94 of the Appeal paper book), but its value has been wrongly included in the Annexure-I to SCN in demanding duty alleging clandestine clearance. He has contended that even though the same invoices, ledgers, LRs were placed before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), the same were rejected by the ld. Commissioner on the ground that these were in the nature of additional evidence, hence, cannot be entertained un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellants in their Appeal paper book enclosed these evidences in the form of invoices, LRs, ledgers, etc. claiming that it relate to the confirmation of demand of ₹ 18,11,396/-, and demonstrated their point referring to the invoice issued by one M/s 1,51,976/-, but both the authorities below have not addressed the issue by analyzing the said evidences and therefore, in the interest of justice, I am of the view that these ledgers, invoices, LRs need to be examined and specific finding on these evidences ought to be recorded by the adjudicating authority. In the result, the impugned Order is set aside to the extent of confirming demand of ₹ 18,11,396/- and consequent penalty on the Appellant company M/s Shubh Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
