9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ms. Priyanka Goel, Advocate for the Respondent. ORDER Per B. Ravichandran: The Revenue is in appeal against the order of Ld. Commissioner (A) dated 05.04.2006. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent cleared excisable goods from their factory during the month of January 2006. They were liable to pay Central Excise duty of Rs. 1,53,14,146/- with educational cess of Rs. 3,06,283/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ailed procedure before forfeiture of the facility. The Revenue pleaded that an order which was upheld on merits cannot be set aside for the procedural infirmity. It was further contended that the Ld. Commissioner (A) should have remanded the matter to the original authority to decide the case afresh. 4. The respondent have filed the cross objection against finding of the Ld. Commissioner (A) rega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent stated that when there was a short payment of duty the proper procedure would be to issue demand notice under section 11(A) and to decide the matter. The facility under Rule 8(1) was withdrawn without any notice and without hearing their side. Hence he pleaded that the Ld. Commissioner (A) order of setting aside the lower authoritys order is correct on this ground. 6. Heard both the side ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it Rules, 2004, the assessee shall be required to pay excise duty for each consignment by debit to the account current and in the event of any failure, it shall be deemed that such goods have been cleared without any payment of duty and the consequences and penalties as provided in these rules shall follow." 8. The original order states that the respondent was liable to pay a Central excise duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Rule 8 (3A). Though the respondent admitted that clerical error resulted in their short payment it is not clear whether duty liability and payment were reflected in the assessment documents. 9. Considering the background of the case and the nature of order issued by the original authority and the reasoning given by the Ld. Commissioner (A) to set aside the original order we find no reason to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
