9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1A of Central Excise Act, 1944, along with interest thereon under section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944, besides imposition of penalty on the charge that additional consideration had been received from their customers. 2. This is the second visit of the dispute before the Tribunal and Learned Counsel for the appellant points out that on the former occasion, taking note of their submissions, it had been ordered that '17. Before concluding this order, we would like to make it clear that we have affirmed demand of duty against the assessee for the period April to August 2000 after noting that undervaluation of goods by them during this period with intent to evade payment of appropriate duty stands established against them and consequentl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... render the findings, were also discarded by the original authority on flimsy ground which should suffice for setting aside of the impugned order. 4. Having heard both the Learned Counsel and Learned Authorised Representative and having perused the records, it is clear that the dispute appears to be not one of compliance with the remand order of the Tribunal but of inconsistency with the procedure for recovery of differential duty stipulated in section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944. We are not concerned with fresh pleas that are at variance, with those that were considered by the Tribunal on the former occasion. Just as piecemeal notices are repugnant to judicial correctness, piecemeal appeal is no less. 5. The Tribunal had, earlier, di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he show cause notice and the evidence said to be placed on record in the annexures to the show cause notice. On the contrary, we find that the impugned order has by '32. The primary evidence in the show cause notice against the assessee is disclosed in its paragraph 5, 5(6) to 5(8) and 6. This evidence is documentary and is based on the documents of the assessee. The inferences therefrom are therein is at Annexure B and the Annexure C. They showed that the records and accounts of the assessee themselves showed undervaluation of the goods by them to the extent of 50%. The extent of this undervaluation was admitted by Shri Kumud C Mehta, the working partner of the assessee before the Panchas. The amounts, by which the assessee undervalued t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee needs to first dislodge the evidences, which is spoken by their working partner and their own records. No attempt has been made therefor. The depositions of Shri Kiran Sheshmalji Bafna and Shri Naresh R Totla only corroborate these evidences. Even with their exclusion; the show cause notice sustains.' set a new trend in adjudication proceedings by mere reliance on references to certain portions of the show cause notice instead of regarding the show cause notice as the framework within which the findings and conclusions, that are comprehensive and logical, must be drawn. Accordingly, we find that the conclusions in the impugned order make it apparent that there has been no examination of the charges or the evidences that are clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
