TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1081X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd that even though the appellants filed this appeal against the impugned order as stated by the Counsel, the investigation has already been completed and the show cause notice dated 03.09.2014 has already been issued and the appellants received the said SCN and have already replied and the proceedings are pending before the adjudicating authority. Considering the above facts, I do not find any infirmity in the Order of the Commissioner extending the time lime for another six months for issuance of SCN. Accordingly, the impugned order is upheld - Decided against assessee. - Appeal No. C/40606/2014 - Final Order No. 41078/2015 - Dated:- 26-3-2015 - R Periasami, Member (T) For the Petitioner : Shri Hari Radhakrishnan, Adv For the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seized SCN should have been issued within six months. He further submits that appellants have cooperated with the investigating authority and statements were recorded and the SCN there was no reason for extension of time to issue SCN. He relied on the Order dated 05.01.2015 issued by the Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, where the Lower Court has held that the appellant had cooperated with DRI and the Court rejected the complaint and acquitted the accused from all the charges under Section 174 IPC read with Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962. He further submitted that regular SCN has already been issued and the appellants have already replied to it and the final adjudication is pending. 4. On the other hand Ld. AR reiterated the Order o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quantity, besides misuse of IECs in import of PVC flex banner consignments by Shri Vikas Jain, CZU-DRI requires six more months to complete the investigation in the said case. According, they have requested for extension of time as envisaged under proviso to Section 110 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962. The reason explained above appears to be genuine and deliberately the appellants were not cooperated to the summons issued. Therefore, the investigation could not be completed by the DRI within the stipulated time. Further, I find that even though the appellants filed this appeal against the impugned order as stated by the Counsel, the investigation has already been completed and the show cause notice dated 03.09.2014 has already been issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
