TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 1268X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s as a condition precedent for hearing of the appeals. Appeal disposed off. - CEA No. 11 of 2013 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 3-4-2014 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. JASPAL SINGH, JJ. Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Advocate for the respondents. ORDER The delay of 108 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 2. This appeal has been preferred by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CB Limited. In July, 2008, the factory premises of the appellants were inspected by the officers of the Central Excise Audit, Faridabad. A show cause notice dated 30-4-2010 (Annexure A-2) was issued to the appellants proposing the demand of ₹ 1.52 crores. The said show cause notice was duly replied by the appellants. The adjudicating authority vide order dated 26-7-2011 (Annexure A-4) confir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of appellant No. 1 would be around ₹ 50 lacs to ₹ 60 lacs. Learned counsel further submitted that the Tribunal has observed that the demand duty could not have been more than ₹ 60 lacs and in such a situation directing appellant No. 1 to deposit an amount of ₹ 75 lacs and appellant No. 2 to deposit ₹ 5 lacs as a condition precedent for hearing of the appeals within ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
