9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents. [Order per : S.S. Sekhon, Member (T)]. - This appeal is against an Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) passed pursuant to a remand order made by this bench vide Order No. 423/92, dated 17-9-1992 (Appeal No. E/570/89/MAS) [1993 (64) E.L.T. 488 (Tri.)] where the Commissioner vide his order impugned in the appeal before us after examining the contentions of the appellants carefully came to a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e have heard ld. Advocate Shri R. Raghavan for the appellants and Shri Murugan, ld. DR for the department. After considering their submissions and the material on record, we would find that the amendment dated 2-9-1986 issued as a corrigendum without referring to the appellants' letter dated 20-8-1986 would be a deliberate act and desire to reduce the demand from Rs. 4,54,684.33 to Rs. 1,18,499.39 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay the duty amount determined. Thus, we find that the Assistant Commissioner has travelled beyond the show cause notice, if he was of the opinion that provisional assessment was required to be confirmed and the present clearances were covered under provisional assessment, then the procedure prescribed under Rule 9B(5) and a notice thereunder was required to be issued by him, he should not have con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
