9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case are DRI officials on the basis of specific information intercepted on Khagraghat Road Railway Station Level Crossing 30 pieces of Gas Cylinders and seized the same. Two persons claimed ownership of the goods who were subsequently arrested and interrogated. The goods are branded with "Mayfrom (R) CCI2 F2, Mayfrom (R) 22CCI2 F2, 12 Refrigent CCI2 F2, manufactured by Worthington cylinder ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Harbans Lal v. Collector of Central Excise and Customs reported in 1993 (67) E.L.T. 20 (S.C.), the subject goods are liable to be returned to the Appellants. 4. Shri T.K. Kar, ld. SDR for the Revenue submits that it is incorrect that no show cause notice has been served to the Appellants. The Show Cause Notice was issued on 26-10-1998 by the Lower Auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith Section 27 of General Clauses Act." 5. Shri Kar, ld. SDR submits that in this case no evidence has been given by the Appellants that the show cause notice was not served to them. In terms of above decision, the service of show cause notice has taken place. He also submits that Superintendent (Appeals) in his letter dated 17-7-2003 has sent a copy of the show cause notice to the Appellants as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
