2001 (5) TMI 641

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ;Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), the Revenue has filed the present appeal. 2. The Joint Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna vide his impugned order passed in de novo proceeding has confirmed the demand of Rs. 1,60,391/- under the provisions of Rule 9(2) and has imposed personal penalty of Rs. 1,000/- upon the respondents. The said orde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the submissions oral and written of the appellant, I find that the contention in the show-cause notice is not clear. For instance, it talks of 84534 qtls. of molasses against a capacity of 20155 qtls. which is an absurdity. Further, there is no demand for the molasses for the year 1991-1992 and 1994-1995. Further, it is not clear how by overflowing the molasses (and thereby evading duty as alleged .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ise Officer. Demand on such weak basis cannot be sustained. It is also to be noted that in this de novo order under appeal, the adjudicating officer has not followed the guidelines given by the Commissioner (Appeals). Against this allegation, the assessee's contention that they had applied for destruction (for the stocks of Pit No. 1) for 1991-1992 and 1994-1995 and their subsequent to seepage, d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X