Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (12) TMI 795 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (12) TMI 795 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Duty demand - Storage of goods in warehouse beyond warehousing period - Held that:- Commissioner (Appeals) passed the order on erroneous facts and therefore, the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot be sustained. In our considered view, the Commissioner (Appeals) is required to ascertain the correct fact and thereafter decide the matter in accordance with law. It is apparent that the respondent had not given the correct fact and therefore, su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tative. & Shri J Nagori, Authorised Representative. For the Respondent : Shi Anand Mishra, Advocate. ORDER Per : Mr. P.K.Das; These appeals are arising out of a common order and therefore, all are taken-up together for disposal. 2. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, we find that the respondents were granted license for Private Bonded Warehousing under the provisions of Section 58 of the Customs Act 1962 for storage of goods without payment of duty on first importatio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he sides argued at length. The main contention of the Learned Authorised Representative for Revenue is that the Commissioner (Appeals) proceeded on the basis of erroneous facts and therefore, the law followed by the Commissioner (Appeal) is wrong. In this context, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue drew the attention of the Bench to the relevant portion of the impugned order. It was observed that the respondent applied for extension of warehousing period before the issuance of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y the Chief commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad Zone on the request made by the respondent for such extension of warehousing period. The rejection is issued by the Chief Commissioner s Office vide their letter F.No.V30-18/CCO/Tech/2003(Pt-1) dated 8/5/2008 and the same have been communicated to the respondent vide letter F.No. BVR/PBW/08/2003-04 dated 26.5.2008 issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise, AR-1, Bhavnagar. The personal hearing in the case before the commissioner (Appeals .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version