9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in as much as the appellant never challenged the earlier order of Commissioner (Appeals) and the Revenue’s appeals was only on the short ground of the powers of Commissioner( Appeals) to remand. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - E/2736/2010-(SM) - 53009/2018 - Dated:- 18-9-2018 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant : Sh. Prem Ranjan, Adv. For the Respondent : Sh. K. Poddar, AR ORDER PER: MRS. ARCHANA WADHWA 1. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of MS ingots and CTD bars + billets. 2. On the basis of the specific information, the Revenue undertook investigations to find out the clandestine activities of assessee and accordingly approached there transporters as al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Central Excise Duty of ₹ 12,77,429/- plus Ed, Cess of ₹ 25,549/-. Their challenge is limited to the excess duty confirmed in the Order impugned. It would therefore be necessary to re-quantify the duty demand by indentifying the documents on the basis of which the shortage of 184.720 MT of CTD Bar have been worked out and alleged in the show Cause Notice instead of 15.16 MT shortage of CTD Bar in the Panchnama dated 06.02.2006. I thus affirm the Central Excise duty demanded amounting to ₹ 12,77,429/- plus Ed. Cess ₹ 25,549/- on the appellant . 6. As seen from above, the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the demand to the extent of ₹ 12,77,429/- and Education Cess to the extent of ₹ 25,549/- and remand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccepted the said order, which had attained finality. When the matter was subsequently remanded to Commissioner(Appeals) by the Tribunal, while disposing of Revenue s Appeals the Commissioner( Appeals) passed the present impugned order and has set aside the rest of the demand along with the setting aside the penalty to that extent and confirmed the demand only to the extent to which it had attained finality vide the first order of Commissioner( Appeals). As such I am of view that the appellant can have no grievance against the present impugned order in as much as the disputed balance amount of duty already stands set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the confirmation is only to the extent to which the demand was confirmed vide the e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
