2013 (2) TMI 540

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Rs. 53,19,377/- has been confirmed against the main applicant for clandestine removal of the goods during the period Apr.'93 to Nov.'96 along with fine and penalty and during the same period a fine of Rs.1,00,000/ - has been imposed on the other applicant. 2. The facts of the case are that the impugned applicants are manufacturers of 'welding electrodes' and during the course of manufacturing of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rmula, the demand will come down to about Rs.8 lakhs. Therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable. He further submitted that as the earlier consultant of the applicants had died and the relevant records were not available with them. They made a request to the department to supply all the relied upon and unrelied upon documents to enable them to reply to the show-cause notice but the same were .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... arrive at the actual demand on the basis of rutile consumption. Therefore, the applicants be asked to make pre-deposit of the impugned demands. 4. Heard both sides, considered their submissions and verified several records. As we are, prima facie at the stay stage and it is a case of clandestine removal and it is also submitted by the applicants that if the formula adopted by them is to be follow .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X