TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 521X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cept the contention about the failure of the lower authority in the matter of verification of records to ascertain the claim of the appellants or any lapse on its part in complying with the directions given by the Tribunal in its earlier order - prima facie findings which have been arrived for the decision in relation to the stay application - Decided against the assessee - E/985/2010 - 282/2011-EX(PB) - Dated:- 14-1-2011 - Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, Shri Mathew John, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri B.L. Narasimhan, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Sunil Kumar, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, President]. Heard the Advocate for the appellant and DR for the Respondent. 2. This is an appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rement of payment of duty, on the basis of the value of the IC engines, the appellants with effect from 1st April, 1995 starting paying the duty while calculating the value of IC engines at the rate of Rs. 25,595/- which was used in the manufacture of tractors below 1800 CC. Further investigation in the matter revealed certain irregularities committed by the appellants which resulted in the issuance of 8 show cause notices during the period November, 1995 to July, 1998 demanding duty to the tune of Rs. 2,52,39,702/- for the period April 1995 to May, 1998. The proceedings were contested by the appellants and the Adjudicating Authority by order dated 22nd January, 2001 confirmed the said demand and also imposed penalty of Rs. 50 lakhs. Aggrie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal while dealing with the said objections, observed thus :- On the direction of the Tribunal, the matter was referred to the Assistant Director (Cost) of Central Excise Department and a meeting was held on 20-9-2005 between the Counsel of the appellant and Assistant Director (Cost) in the presence of learned SDR. In the meeting, the proceedings of the meeting produced before us and it was agreed by the Revenue that the appellants are entitled for abatement of Central Excise duty paid on bought out components which are used in the manufacture of IC engines which are captively consumed in the manufacture of exempted tractors subject to verification of factual position regarding payment of Central Excise duty. The appellant has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atisfied the Commissioner (Appeals) about the claim of the appellants. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) though recorded in his order about submission of written submissions, but failed to take into consideration the invoices. Proper verification of those invoices would, according to the learned Advocate, disclose that there was no substance in the demand against the appellant. According to the appellant, failure in that regard by the lower authority, has caused great prejudice to the appellant. 8. The DR on the other hand, submitted that inspite of giving sufficient opportunities, the appellants have not been able to establish their case for the last more than 15 years and it is too late for the appellants to make grievance about non-c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at by the said authority in its order, the learned advocate submitted that in view of specific ground in the Memo of Appeal about the availability of such invoices for verification by the department being sufficient to disprove the said finding, no separate ground of challenge to the said finding was raised. 12. The orders by the adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) discloses in detail about the various opportunities given to the parties to produce the relevant documents. In fact, the order passed by the Tribunal while remanding the matter on 14th October, 2005, specifically observed that the matter was remanded to verify the factual position regarding payment of Central Excise duty in respect of bought out components whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e construed to mean only the Memo of Appeal. It would apply to the entire proceedings before the appellate authority. In the absence of specific challenge to the said finding, the submission that the department can verify the invoices available with the appellants is devoid of substance. 13. It is pertinent to note that inspite of this being a third round of litigation in the same case and sufficient opportunities having been given to produce the relevant documents and inspite of being aware and further alerted about the requirement of production of all the relevant documents, the appellants did not produce all the relevant documents and were contend to produce only sample documents and expected the authorities to decide the matter on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
