9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner (A.R) Per: S.S. Kang 1. Heard both sides. 2. Applicant M/s Bhagyashali Textile Mills Pvt Ltd filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs 2,53,69,110/-, interest and penalty. Other applicants filed applications for waiver of pre-deposit of penalties. 3. The applicants M/s Bhagyashali Textile Mills Pvt Ltd are engaged in the manufacture of texturised polyester ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ply of the appellant. The contention is that the relevant documents were supplied on 23.3.2010 and as per the remand order passed by the Tribunal two months time is granted to the appellant to file a reply but the adjudicating authority fixed hearing date on 12.4.2010 without waiting for the reply and passed the impugned order. The contention of the applicant is that as per the remand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppressing the value and quantity just to evade payment of duty. The various statements recorded during investigation support these allegations and therefore the demand is rightly made. The Revenue specifically relies on Annexure B to the Show Cause Notice where the differential duty of an amount of Rs 58 lakhs was confirmed on the basis of slips recovered from the appellants premises ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments except mentioned at serial 23 of Annexure E to toe Show Cause Notice were supplied on 23.3.2010. The adjudicating authority thereafter fixed the date of hearing on 12.4.2010. In view of these facts, we find merit in the contention of the applicant that the directions given by the Tribunal in the remand order were not complied with. Further, we find that during the pendency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
