TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the additional reply could be filed by appellants, the matter requires to be remanded to the original authority for reconsideration of this issue. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Excise Appeal No.40606 of 2017 and 42201 of 2017 - FINAL ORDER No. 40883-40884 / 2019 - Dated:- 1-7-2019 - MS. SULEKHA BEEVI, C.S., MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri M. Karthikeyan, Advocate For the Appellant Shri L. Nandakumar, AC (AR) For the Respondent ORDER The brief facts of the case are that on intelligence gathered that appellants M/s.Emkaay Engineering Works are not properly accounting their production and are indulging in clearance of goods without payment of duty, the officers of Preventiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,16,404/- for the goods under issue No.(iii) above, and ₹ 24,967/- towards duty payable for issue No.(iv) above and also an amount of ₹ 9,33,132/- was proposed to be recovered for the issue of difference in ER-1 Returns and the Balance Sheet for the year 2009-10. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand along with interest and imposed equal penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, besides imposing equal penalty on Shri R. Chinniah, Proprietor under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 2.1 On behalf the appellants, Ld. Counsel Shri M.Karthikeyan submitted that the appellant has accepted the lia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... job work basis, they have not been able to produce any evidence in this regard. They have been given enough opportunity to furnish break up of details with regard to difference in quantity in ER-1 returns and the balance sheet. 4. Heard both sides. 5. The appellant has conceded the liability with regard to issues (ii), (iii) and (iv) raised in the SCN. The contest in the present appeal is with regard to issue of difference in quantity of goods as shown cleared in ER-1 returns and the balance sheet. Ld. counsel for the appellant has adverted to the additional reply filed by them to argue that they are doing trading activity also and the goods manufactured on job work basis were sold by them. However, the details wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
