TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (2) TMI 371
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shri D.N. Chaudhary, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Member (J)]. - Applicants filed these applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duties and penalties. 2. The Commissioner of Central Excise in the impugned order held that M/s. Sardar Metal Industries, M/s. Ram Containers and M/s. Arjun Enterprises are three Units owned by member of one family and all the family ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d them to inspect the record and to take photocopies of the same. The appellants inspected the records on 12-8-2002. The contention of the appellants is that as they had inspected the record on 12-8-2002, thereafter, no proper and effective opportunity was granted to them before passing the impugned order on 31-8-2002 by the Commissioner of Central Excise. Their contention is also that in the inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ants is that no proper opportunity was granted to them. From the record, we find that the Commissioner granted six opportunities. As per the appellants own submissions, they had inspected the records and obtained photocopies of the documents on 12-8-2002 but on that day none appeared before the Commissioner and the Commissioner of Central Excise again adjourned the case for 29-8-2002. On that date....