2006 (6) TMI 272

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ication. Hence the said appeal (with stay application) has been called for. After examining the records and hearing both sides, we are of the view that the appeals require to be disposed of finally at this stage. Accordingly, after dispensing with pre-deposit, we proceed to deal with the appeals. 2. The appeals are against an order passed by learned Commissioner of Central Excise against the appellants ex parte. The impugned order has confirmed a demand of duty of over Rs. 4 crores against M/s Erode Rana Textile Processors (P) Ltd. (the appellants in E/782/2005) under Section 11A (2) of the Central Excise Act,' with interest thereon under Section 11AB of the Act. It has also imposed a penalty of equal amount on the party under Rule ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d Counsel for the appellants has submitted that, on account of denial of opportunity to cross-examine the remaining witnesses, the appellants were virtually denied effective opportunity to reply to the show cause notice. It is claimed that the adjudicating authority denied natural justice to the appellants. Learned Counsel has, however, expressed his client's willingness to file reply to the show cause notice at the earliest, if permitted. Learned SDR, at this juncture, submits that, as the Manager of the company, in his statement, admitted clandestine removal of the goods and as no counter was given to the show cause notice, the order passed by learned Commissioner is liable to be upheld in toto. Learned SDR, in this connection, has referr....