2019 (4) TMI 987

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 06.09.2018 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has upheld the Order-in-Original and dismiss the appeal. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are engaged for manufacture and clearance of excisable goods viz. automotive filters, industrial filters and ceram .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... who has rejected the same. Hence, this appeal. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. 4. Ld. Counsel for the appellants submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the law. He further submitted that though there was omission on the part of the appellant in not filing the ER-6 Returns prescr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at for violation of any Rule in the CCR, 2004, general penalty is provided under Rule 15A whereas in the impugned order, penalty has been imposed by resorting to Rule 27 of the CER, 2002 and Rule 12 (6) of the said Rules. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. AR defended the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X