9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 350X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eir grievance is about confirmation of the Central Excise duty on the entry as opening balance of ₹ 96,77,194/- appearing in duty calculation worksheet. Since, the Commissioner (Appeals) has clearly held that the correctness of ₹ 11,22,927/- and verification of documents related them to be re-examined, therefore, stating that appellant has not disputed clandestine removal is clear co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ness of entire duty amount of ₹ 11,22,927/- and penalty. 2. Shri. Rahul Gajera, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that as per para 6 of the impugned order it is an open remand, however, in para 5 of the impugned order, the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded that appellant has not disputed clandestine removal of goods. It is this observation of the Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is required to be set aside to be decided afresh after verifying the facts with documents and then to come to conclusion with justified reasons. 7) In view of above, I set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to be decided afresh, verifying the facts with documents available. 5. On the plain reading of the above para 6 and 7, the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has remanded the en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty on the entry as opening balance of ₹ 96,77,194/- appearing in duty calculation worksheet. I find that since, the Commissioner (Appeals) has clearly held that the correctness of ₹ 11,22,927/- and verification of documents related them to be re-examined, therefore, stating that appellant has not disputed clandestine removal is clear contradictory. Therefore, I am of the view that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
