TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act is the resultant outcome of such remand order that was re-adjudicated by the Commissioner of Customs (Export-II) and decided on 27.11.2017 without appellant being noticed. Appellant Shri S.L. Agrawal filed an affidavit to the effect that no such show-cause notice for hearing, leading to adjudication order, under challenge in this appeal was served on him and despite direction to learned Autho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - DR. SUVENDU KUMAR PATI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Sanjiv Agarwal, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Manoj Kumar, Assistant Commissioner, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER Confirmation of penalty under Section 112(a) (b) of the Customs Act, 1962, in the third round of litigation, by the Commissioner of Customs (Export-II) Mumbai in Order-in-Original No. CAO No. 21 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CAs Shri Ravindra Shah and Shri S.L. Agarwal were dropped. Shri S.L. Agarwal is the appellant before us. 3. Appellant had challenged the order before the CESTAT and the matter was remanded back for rehearing vide order dated 25.06.2004 where penalty under Section 112(o) was directed to be re-determined after the demand of duty upon DGFT decision is known. The matter was heard, suffered another ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was re-adjudicated by the Commissioner of Customs (Export-II) and decided on 27.11.2017 without appellant being noticed. Appellant Shri S.L. Agrawal filed an affidavit to the effect that no such show-cause notice for hearing, leading to adjudication order, under challenge in this appeal was served on him and despite direction to learned Authorised Representative, the respondent-department failed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
