2002 (1) TMI 1177

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ri Atul Saxena, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. -  This appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the impugned Order-in-Original of the Commissioner vide which he had partly allowed and partly disallowed their abatement of duty claim. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of M.S. ingots and runners etc. They discharged their du....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed order. 3. The learned Counsel has contented that the verification report of the A.C. was not supplied to the appellants and that the abatement claim should have been allowed from 16-12-98 and not from 17-12-98 to 30-12-98 and that the claim for the period 19-1-99 to 3-2-99 could not be disallowed as the appellants gave requisite closure information to the competent authority. The Counse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by the A.C. and even the Commissioner himself has so recorded in the impugned order. But there is nothing on record to suggest if copy of that report was supplied to the appellants. That report was required to be supplied when the Commissioner had not acted upon the same completely. The appellants made the abatement claims for 16-12-98 to 30-12-98 and 19-1-99 to 3-2-99. The A.C. submitted his rep....