TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble by the appellant. The matter needs to be reconsidered by the adjudicating authority by providing the necessary documents whereby the correct quantification of duty, if any can be ascertained. Accordingly, the impugned order set aside and the appeal allowed by way of remand to the adjudicating authority for passing a fresh order. - HON'BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL), MR. RAMESH NAIR And HON'BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL), MR. RAJU Shri Paritosh Gupta, Advocate appeared for the Appellant Shri R. Nathan, Assistant Commissioner (Authorized Representative) for the Respondent ORDER RAMESH NAIR The brief facts of the case are that the appellant (being 100% EOU) engaged in the manufacture of sheet glass. On 24.10.1996 the appellant have started a tria ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tters issued by the department were quashed and set aside on the ground that such demand letters could not have been issued without issuance of show cause notice and adjudication thereon. The department being aggrieved by the said order of the Hon ble High Court challenged the same before the Hon ble Supreme Court by way of SLP No. CC/4808 of 2009. The Hon ble Supreme Court while disposing the SLP, ordered for permission to the department to issue show cause notice. Also by recording that appellant would not raised the issue of limitation in the adjudication proceedings. Thereafter department issued the show cause notice dated 04.05.2009. The appellant in its interim reply requested the department for providing the basis of quantification o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. On careful consideration of the submission made by both the sides and perusal of record, we find that at present the limited issue raised by the appellant is that the department has not provided the details of computation of the demand of duty, therefore, the appellant is unable to make their defense submission. To appreciate the appellant s claim, where it is right or otherwise, we find that show cause notice dated 04.05.2009 has not relied upon any document from which the demand can be quantified. Moreover, in the show cause notice the details of the demand is given as under : Sr. No. Particulars Duty Involved 1. DTA Sales, differential duty, Period Oct, 96 to March 97 60,02,348-00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
