2007 (4) TMI 583

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Anirban Dutta, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Heard both sides. 2. The Respondents generated two invoices No. 9901001184 and 9901001189 both dated 21-11-1999. The Respondents claimed that the first invoice was generated by the computer wrongly and no goods were actually moved under the same. The Lower Appellate authority has allowed the refund against such invoice amountin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Department that the said invoice has been used for transportation of another consignment. As regards the contention of the ld. SDR that the appellants have violated the provisions of Rule 173G(2) in not cancelling the invoice and no intimation was given to the Jurisdictional Officer, the Departmental Authorities are free to take penal action as provided under the rules for violation of the said pr....