TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1392X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /96030/14 in Appeal No. C/88237/14 - - - Dated:- 6-1-2015 - Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Shri P. S. Pruthi, Member (Technical), JJ. For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri A. K. Singh, Addl. Commissioner (AR) ORDER Per Anil Choudhary Heard the parties. 2. It is pointed out by the Revenue that against the same impugned order, the appeal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld the goods liable to confiscation nor any penalty has been imposed on the importer. Hence, the appeal field by the Revenue before us. In the ground of application it has been urged that though the show-cause notice proposed confiscation of the goods under Section 111 (m) of the Customs Act and imposition of penalties under Section 112, the adjudicating authority has not given any finding in resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that the importer is liable to pay CVD on the basis of MRP. No quantification of duty has been made by the adjudicating authority. Further, the issue of confiscability of the items and the imposition of penalty proposed in the show-cause notice has not been examined by the adjudicating authority. Thus, there are many infirmities in the impugned order. Therefore, we set aside the impugned or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
