9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1244X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mr.R.K. Mishra, D.R. ORDER PER: V.PADMANABHAN The present appeal challenges the Order-in-Appeal No. No.160-CE/2016 dated 24.04.2017. The Departmental Officers searched two units of the appellant on 10.05.2013, pursuant to the intelligence that the appellant was clearing switch gears and other electrical goods without payment of duty. During the course of search, the officers recovered (1) vari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roprietor was reduced to Rs. 50,000/-. The present appeal challenges this impugned order. 2. With the above background, we have heard Shri R.K. Verma, ld. Advocate for the appellant as well as R.K. Mishra representing for the Revenue. 3. The submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant are summarized below:- 3.1 The demand for duty has been raised by Revenue by working out the total turn-ove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot arise. 4. Ld. DR on the other hand justified the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. The appellant has got 2 units in which various electrical goods such as switch gear was being manufactured. The dispute, which covers the period 2008-09 to 2012-13, is that the appellant did not register themselves but claimed the benefit of SSI exemption Notification No.8/2003. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roducts. 7. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) in para 13 of the impugned order has elaborately discussed above ground. He has restrained from extending discounts more than 30% for the reason that the appellant has not submitted any documentary evidence in the form of invoices/bills/ challans or Chartered Accountants Certificate to suggest that the discounts varied from 30 to 80%. He has fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
