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

2016 (2) TMI 63 - CESTAT KOLKATA

2016 (2) TMI 63 - CESTAT KOLKATA - TMI - Waiver of pre-deposit of CENVAT Credit and equal amount of penalty imposed seeked - non providing adequate opportunity in defending the case by way of supplying the documents and allowing cross examination of the witnesses as submitted by assessee - Held that:- Analyzing the said contention of the appellant, we find that even though the show cause notice was issued on 17/12/2012, specifically mentioning therein to file their reply within thirty days, but .....

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 invoices during the period May, 2008 to December, 2009 when the finished goods were claimed to have been manufactured and cleared on payment of duty. While confirming the demand, the Ld. Commissioner referred to the statement of the proprietor, the employees, the transporters, input suppliers and the certificate issued by the Chartered Engineer etc. in arriving at the conclusion that the appellant at the relevant point of time did not have infrastructure to manufacture the quantity of excisab .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(JUDICIAL) AND SHRI H.K. THAKUR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For the Petitioner : Sri N.K. Chowdhury, Advocate & Sri B.N. Chattopadhyay, Consultant For the Respondent : Sri S. S. Chatterjee, Supdt. (A.R.) ORDER PER DR. D.M. MISRA This is an application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of CENVAT Credit of ₹ 9.00 Crores and equal amount of penalty imposed under Section 11AC of CEA, 1944 read with Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules,2002. 2. At the outset, Ld. Advocate Shri N.K. Chowdhury for the App .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

referred to and relied upon in the show cause notice. He submits that few documents were though handed over to them but since all the relevant documents, were not provided, therefore, detailed reply to the Notice could not be filed by the applicant. He submits that the Ld. Commissioner has proceeded with the show cause notice unilaterally accepting the evidences referred to in the show cause notice, without allowing an opportunity to the appellant to rebut the said evidences, hence, the order i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to manufacture the quantity of finished goods cleared on payment of duty, inputs were not transported to the factory, inputs suppliers had not supplied the inputs etc.. He submits that even though the Revenue has recorded statements of many transporters/truck owners about transportation of the inputs from the raw material suppliers to their factory, but all of them were not summoned for examination. Further, he has submitted that the statement of the proprietor which has been relied upon by the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the applicant was given more than three adjournments. He submits that the applicant responded to the show cause notice requesting the documents only after the said three opportunity of hearings were over. The requested documents, however, were handed over to them during the course of the proceeding. Therefore, there is no violation of principle of natural justice. The Ld. A.R. for the Revenue submitted that the cross examination was requested by the appellant but not allowed by the Ld. Adju .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cuments and allowing cross examination of the witnesses, before accepting the statements as evidence that were relied upon in the issuance of notice and confirming the demand. Analyzing the said contention of the appellant, we find that even though the show cause notice was issued on 17/12/2012, specifically mentioning therein to file their reply within thirty days, but the appellant chose not to respond to the said notice; also in spite of sufficient opportunities of hearings were allowed to th .....

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