9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 948X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hattopadhyay, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER Per Ashok Jindal : The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order demanding duty alleging clandestine removal of goods along with interest and imposing penalty on the appellant. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of belt scrappers and parts thereof and clearing the same on paymen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said gate slips. Comparison statement was not provided by the appellant. The gate slips which duly corresponded with the Central Excise invoices for the period in dispute.. 2.3 It was also alleged that the appellant did not submit the packing list for which, raising demand was arrived on the basis of total number of belt scrappers divided by total number of packages as disclosed in the Central Ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the documents from the Superintendent on the same date and file a reply till 31.03.2013. But unfortunately, the impugned order was passed on 28.03.2013. The said documents were supplied to the appellant only on 29.03.2013 at 4.30 PM. Although, the appellant filed reconciliation statement on 31.03.2013, but impugned order was passed on 28.03.2013 confirming demand of duty along with interest and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned order is to be set aside. 4. Heard the ld.Counsel for the appellant. 5. We find that in this case, the Adjudicating Authority has violated the principles of natural justice passing the order ex parte in hurry without waiting for reconciliation statement filed by the appellant. Therefore, the impugned order has no merit. Accordingly, the same is set aside. 6. In these circumstances, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
