9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SCN did not establish that the goods covered by the invoice numbers stated therein were manufactured by the appellant - Also, Revenue did not discharge its burden to prove that the goods exported through the invoices stated in the said show cause notice were manufactured by the appellant - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/3198/2009-EX[SM] - A/71300/2017-SM[BR] - Dated:- 25-10-2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat vide invoice nos.15, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, 34, 35, and 40 dated 04/05/2005 to 22/06/2005 appellant exported goods to Pakistan and Dubai valued at ₹ 27,12,555/- without payment of Central Excise duty and without furnishing any bond. Therefore, through the said show cause notice appellants were called upon to show cause as to why Central Excise duty amounting to ₹ 4,43,186/- should not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal Authority confirmed the demand and imposed equal penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). Learned Commissioner (Appeals) decided through impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 17/09/2009. The Commissioner (Appeals) has not accepted the contentions by the appellant that there was absolutely no difference between the quantity of Transformers and raw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... show cause notice were manufactured by them. He further submitted that it was submitted before the Original Authority that the goods covered by the invoices stated in the show cause notice were purchased from outside and exported as such and therefore, such goods did not require following any procedure of Central Excise. 4. Heard the Learned A.R. for Revenue who has supported the impugned Order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
