2019 (2) TMI 472

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 139/2019
Central Excise
MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Mr. M. N. Bharathi, Advocate, VMJ Associates (S. Muthu Venkataraman, Adv.) For the Appellant Mrs. Kavitha Podwal, Superintendent (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The appellants have filed these appeals against the impugned orders dated 9.12.2015 and 20.5.2015 vide which the Commissioner (A) has rejected the main appeal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... impugned order the lower authority had confirmed Rs. 1,89,292/- towards the clandestine removal of CTD bars & rods and confiscated the same under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 and imposed penalty under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 and Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Aggrieved by this order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (A), who rejected the same. He .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ong with other appeals may be remanded to the Commissioner (A) with a direction to decide the appeals on merits. 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that in the main appeal, the Commissioner (A) has not given any finding on the merit and has rejected the appeal of the appellant only on non-depositing 7.5% of the duty and penalty. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X