2004 (3) TMI 450

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., for the Appellant. Shri A. Shukla, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. - The assessees are engaged in the manufacture of HDPE/Polypropylene sacks and moulded furniture and they were availing credit of duty paid on inputs and on capital goods in terms of Rule 57A and Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. During the period February to September, 19....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Chief Executive Officer of the company. In the above appeal the company challenges the demand of Rs. 42,50,000/- and the demand of Rs. 1,44,809/- only, and the penalty. 2. We have heard both sides. The main grievance of the appellants is that the debit notes relied upon by the department to hold they represent extra consideration on which duty has to be paid were never furnished to them as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ies of hearing have been extended by the adjudicating authority and the appellants did not avail of the same. However, since the appellants state that they will be in a position to satisfactorily explain the issue of debit notes and also argue that demand raised on the ground that credit was taken on invalid documents is barred by limitation, in the interest of justice we extend fresh opportunity ....