2008 (5) TMI 585

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Appellant. Shri S.N. Prasad, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order].  - These applications are for stay of recovery of duty amounting to Rs. 4,66,200/- along with the penalties of Rs. 40,000/- upon each applicant. The case relates to the alleged clandestine removal of goods without payment of duty. 2. After hearing the applications for some time, I find that the appeals themselve....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... necessary records were maintained and nothing incriminating was found in the manufacturing premises. The Commissioner (Appeals) has not dealt with any submission made in their appeal memo and has simply stated that the matter has been dealt by the original authority and the details has been clearly brought out in the show cause notices and accordingly, while he upheld the duty demand, he reduced ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issions made by both sides and perused the records. I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not dealt with any of submission made by the appellants and simply stated that the same has been fully discussed by the original authority and clearly brought out in the Panchnama and show cause notice etc. This cannot be considered as speaking order and Commissioner (Appeals) should have dealt with the ....