9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1122X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Prakash Shah, Advocate for respondent Per: Archana Wadhwa Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal. 2. After hearing the Ld. AR duly represented by Shri Ajay Kumar and Ld. Advocate Shri Prakash Shah appearing for the respondent. We find that the assessee M/s. Weikfield Products Co. (India) Pvt. Ltd. was cleari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g etc., which was ordered to be confiscated by him. The appeal against the said order was rejected by Commissioner (Appeals), thus the necessitating filing of appeal before Tribunal. The CESTAT vide final order dt. 1.4.2005 remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority. Apart from the merits of the case, the Tribunal observed as under: (a) With regard t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f in the said RT-12 returns. The details relating to total quantity and value of the clearances have been shown separately in column no.5 of the return. As such, I find that the appellant has not suppressed information. (c) I further observe that as required under Ministry's Circular NO. 249/83/96-CX dt. 11.10.1996 in Para 3.1-A (Sr. No.vi), which lays down that the Range officer may call ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after hearing. The order impugned is required to be set aside and matter remanded in above terms. 4. Thereafter, vide the present impugned order, Commissioner (Appeals) extended the benefit of limitation to the assessee and confirmed the demand only for the period of six months. He also dropped the penalty against the respondent. The said order of Commissioner (Appeals) is impugne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
