Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (4) TMI 928

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing authority directed the appellants to collect the documents from DGCEI office, who has not supplied the documents to them, as contended by the respondents. But, the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the documents were supplied with the show cause notice, which is totally mis-conceived, inconsistent and contradicting. The ld.Advocate Shri S.J. Vyas fairly submit that they could not file the reply to the show cause notice as the documents were not supplied to them. I agree with the submissions of the learned Advocate that if the Department fails to supply the relied upon documents, it is difficult to file the reply to the show cause notice and therefore, the impugned orders are not sustainable on this ground alone. - Matter remanded bac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ioner (Appeals) rejected the appeals filed by the appellants against which Appeal No. E/694-696/2009, E/923-924/2009 and E/786-787/2009 were filed by the appellants. By Order-in-Appeal No.Commr(A)304-308/VDR-I/2010, dt.20.10.2010, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Adjudication order against the demand of duty and penalties in respect of M/s Atlanta Electricals Pvt.Ltd. and its Director Shri Harshadbhai A. Mehta and set aside the penalties against the other co-notices. The assesses company and its Directors filed Appeal, No.E/190-191/2011. Revenue also filed appeal No.E/110/2011 against the assessee M/s Atlanta Electricals Pvt.Ltd. 3. Shri S.J. Vyas, ld.Advocate appearing on behalf of M/s Vipul Copper Pvt.Ltd and Shri Nathubhai, Direc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ul Gajera, ld.Advocate is appearing on behalf of M/s Atlanta Electricals Pvt.Ltd. and its Director Shri Harshadbhai A. Mehta. He submits that their case relates to demand of ₹ 92,798.00 and squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Monarch Metals Pvt. Ltd (supra) upheld by Hon ble Gujarat High Court. He further submit that the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand of duty along with interest and penalty against M/s Atlanta Electricals Pvt.Ltd. and therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue against them is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. He further submits that the main allegation is against the transporter and the registered dealer. But the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the penalty against tran .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the records, I find that the main grievance of the appellants in the case of M/s Vipul Copper Pvt.Ltd and others arising out of the Order-in-Appeal dated 18.02.2009 that both the authorities below fialed to appreciate that the Department had not provided the relied upon documents. On perusal of the Adjudication order, I find that the Adjudicating authority observed that appellants were directed to collect the copies of the relied upon documents from DGCEI office. In this context, learned Advocate for the appellant submits that they have made several correspondence with DGCEI even that the documents were not supplied to them. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the Annexure D of the show cause notice clearly shows that the copies of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ders to the extent of the appeals filed by the appellants are set aside and the matters are remanded to the Adjudicating authority to decide afresh after supplying the relied upon documents to the appellants, to file the reply to the show cause notice. Needless to say that the Adjudicating authority shall give proper opportunity of hearing before decision. He would also consider the decision placed by the learned Advocates before the Tribunal on the identical issue as contended by the appellants . All the appeals filled by the appellants are allowed by way of remand. The appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 11. The applications filed by the applicants for extension of the period of the stay order are dismissed as infructuous. (Di .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates