9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R, for the Respondent. ORDER Heard both sides. 2. The applicant filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 6,58,17,427/-, interest and penalty of the equal amount. 3. The applicants are engaged in the manufacture of bulk drugs which are liable to excise duty. During the survey conducted by the Income Tax Department, the applicant surrendered an amount of Rs. 5.5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicant removed the goods without payment of duty or undervalued the goods to evade excise duty. The applicant had not shown the amount which is surrendered to the Income Tax authorities as is in respect of the manufactured goods, therefore, the demand is not sustainable. 5. The applicant relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, v. Mayfair Resorts - 2011 (21) S.T.R. 589 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods which is reflected in the statutory record. We find that in the balance sheet nowhere applicant disclosed that the amount in question was surrendered to the Income Tax authorities is in respect of sale of excisable goods. The Tribunal in a similar situation in the case of Mayfair Resorts (supra) upheld the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby demand which was confirmed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
