9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 509X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mount of ₹ 10,000/- vide Challan No.2017457502 and the mode of payment being e-payment, the appellant did not challenge, but paid the same without questioning the legality of the same. This means that the offence, as alleged, had indeed been committed, which aspect is clearly hit by the proviso to Section 23(2) ibid., which takes away the right of the owner to relinquish his title to such go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the matter was taken up for hearing, Shri G. Vijayabalan, Learned Advocate, appeared for the assessee-appellant and Shri Vikas Jhajharia, Learned Departmental Representative, appeared for the Revenue. 3. The Adjudicating Authority vide Order-in-Original has rejected the refund inter alia on the grounds that an offence had been committed and thereafter, the case was adjudicated by the AC/DC of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had been committed as there was a mis-declaration in the quantity which came to be adjudicated, consequent to which fine and penalty were imposed. Thus, the First Appellate Authority having upheld the rejection of refund, assailing the same, the present appeal has been filed. 5.1 After hearing both sides and from a perusal of the pleadings and the documents placed on record by the appellant, I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cate for the appellant that the collection of fine and penalty was without the authority of law cannot be gone into by this forum now. 6. Moreover, there is a specific observation by the Adjudicating Authority that the appellant/importer had requested for adjudication without issuance of Show Cause Notice as well as personal hearing, which fact has not been denied by the appellant, but without ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
