2002 (10) TMI 650

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ocate and D.K. Dhar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A.K. Mondal, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - Shri R.N. Bajoria, learned Sr. Advocate for the appellants submits that the appellants are issuing computerised invoices and while preparing the same at the time of clearance of the goods, some of the invoices were cancelled on account of certian mistake....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Excise Rules, 1944. He, further, submits that apart from the fact of cancellation of invoices, there is no evidence on record to show the clandestine removal of the goods. The Commissioner has observed that intimation about the cancellation was not given within 24-hours. As such, he submits that the demand of duty on this simple ground is not justified. 2. As regards penalty, he submits th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gned Order imposing penalty is not justified. 3. We have also heard Shri A.K. Mondal, learned J.D.R. for the Revenue. He reiterates the reasons of the Commissioner. 4. After considering the submissions made from both sides and after going through the impugned Order, we fully agree with the learned Advocate appearing for the appellants that there is no case of clandestine removal of....