9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DER Heard Mr. S. Murugappan, Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. A.R. Srinivas, Learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner, a proprietaryship concern, is engaged in the import of glassware and enamelware and have been issued Import Export Code during the year 2006. The petitioner had been importing glassware from Singapore and Indonesia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paragraph 6 of the impugned order. After the matter was heard, the Commission has admitted the settlement case and settled the matter by directing the petitioner to pay the entire duty of Rs. 89,45,851/-, as demanded in the show cause notice. After taking note of the admitted amount, which was remitted by the petitioner viz., Rs. 79,76,642/-, the petitioner was granted fifteen days time to pay th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The conclusion arrived at by the Commission could be negative for more than one reason. Firstly, the Commission did not undertake any exercise to find out as to whether the plea raised by the petitioner that there was calculation error is correct or not. In fact, sub-section (5) of Section 127 of the Act, empowers the Commission to do so. The Commission did not do such exercise, nor it calle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
