TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (3) TMI 647
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the Respondent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. - In this appeal, challenge has been made to the impugned order-in-original vide which the adjudicating authority has confirmed the duty demand along with penalty as detailed therein, against the appellants. 2.During the period September, 1997 to March, 2000, the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Hot Re-rolled products o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in accordance with law. After the remand, the adjudicating authority had passed the impugned order under appeal. 3.We have heard both the sides and gone through the record. 4.We find that the ACP of the mills of the appellants has been determined by the adjudicating authority by taking into account two inspection reports, one dated 6-3-1998 and another dated 21-3-1998. But both these reports in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of the parameters of the mills. After alleged inspection, no copy of the report was supplied to the appellants. 5.Another inspection report relied upon by the adjudicating authority is dated 21-3-1998 when the officers found the parameters 'd' = 223 mm, 'n'= 980 and 'I' = 0.33 but there is no evidence on record to prove if before the visit of the officers, any notice was sent to the appellants.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned as to why the Superintendent put his signatures on the report on 18-3-1998 when the report was allegedly prepared on 21-3-1998. The non-supply of this report to the appellants and keeping the report secret also remains unexplained on the record. All these circumstances go a long way to throw thick cloud on the very genuineness of this report. Therefore, no reliance could be placed on such a re....