9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1478X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MR. R.K. SINGH, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For the Appellant : Shri.B.L. Narasimhan, Advocate For the Respondent: Shri.Yogesh Agarwal, D.R. JUDGEMENT PER: R.K. SINGH These appeals have been filed against Order-in-Original No.18-24 /Commr /CEX /ADJ/ JBP/2010 dated 31.08.2010 in terms of which the duty demand of Rs. 11,55,75,287/- was confirmed in respect of the following show cause notices alongwith i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... states that on merits the issue has been covered against the appellant as far as the duty demand is concerned in the case of Hywa (India) Pvt. Ltd.vs. CCE, Belapur - 2013 (92) ELT 59 (Tri.-Mum.) and Audi Automobiles vs. CCE, Indore - 2010 (249) ELT 124 (Tri.-Del.). He however pleads as has been held in the aforesaid orders the penalties should be waived. In addition he also pleads that the demand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in view of the facts and circumstances in those cases which are similar to the facts and circumstances in the present cases) no penalty was warranted. As regards the contention of the ld. D.R. that the appellant had entered into a colorable arrangement to evade duty, we would like to observe that CESTAT in aforesaid two judgments had taken into account the circumstances obtaining in those two case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
