TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o appeal against the adjudicating authority was filed by the Respondent, then it has to be interpreted that they have accepted the clandestine removal of the goods. Having accepted the fact, Respondent could not have raised the plea before the Lower Authorities that there was no clandestine removal of the goods. In this regard the observations made by the Apex Court in the case of Tractors and Farm Equipment Limited vs. Collector of Customs, Madras [1997 (2) TMI 111 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], are very relevant that a stand taken by an assessee during the earlier proceedings cannot be altered by that assessee subsequently. On the similar facts, the ratio laid down by the Apex Court is clearly applicable to the present proceedings. While allo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und claim of ₹ 1,50,199/- earlier filed by the Respondent was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority under Order No.278/ACG/2010 dated 17.01.2010. Ld. A.R. made the bench go through paragraphs 2 and 6 of the Order-in-Original dated 17.01.2010 to argue that the said amount of ₹ 1,50,199/- was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority against which no appeal has been filed. That once the Respondent has accepted the duty liability of ₹ 1,50,199/- on clandestine removal of goods, then the same respondent cannot take a different stand before the Appellate Authority under a parallel proceedings on the same issue that the goods were not clandestinely removed while passing Order-in-Appeal dated 22.02.2013. Ld. A.R. relied upon the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was issued to the Respondent regarding clandestine removal of the goods. In reply to the show cause notice it was argued nu party that that the present management took over the factory on 21.11.2008 and the earlier staff looking after the accounts left the Respondent. It was thus argued before the Lower Authority that there was no clandestine removal of goods and confirmation of demand and imposition of penalty is required to be set aside. The First Appellate Authority not only set aside the Order-in-Original dated 30.11.2010 passed by the Adjudicating Authority but also ordered to pay the amount paid alongwith interest under section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. It is the case of the revenue that no interest of deposit is payable u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
