TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (3) TMI 60
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for the appellants. Mrs. Sudha Koka, SDR for the revenue. Per Shri M. V. Ravindran (Oral) These stay petitions are filed for pre-deposit of the following amounts. (i) Demand of Cenvat Credit of Rs.37,65,678/- along with interest (ii) Equal penalty under Section 11AC (iii) Personal penalty of Rs.5,00,000/- on Shri K. Ramesh. 2. Heard both side....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts that the appellant had before him led detailed evidences challenging the findings of the Adjudicating Authority. It is his submission that learned Commissioner (A) has not given any findings on the said evidences which were produced before him. He would also submit that the said findings are recorded in paragraph 6. He would submit that as against the demand of Rs.37.65 lakhs, the appellants ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ra 24 to 28 of the impugned order on various arguments of the appellants including the volumes of paper books submitted by the appellants. In para 24 of the impugned order, there is categorical finding to the effect that statements from so many persons were recorded, which evidence made out a strong case against the appellants by establishing that the imported scrap was never received in the facto....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder the proviso to Section 11A (1) and imposing the penalties. Impugned order is a well reasoned speaking order and I do not interfere with the order passed. I pass the following order. ORDER The impugned order is upheld and the appeal is dismissed. It can be seen from the above reproduced findings that the learned Commissioner (A) has not recorded any reasons for coming to such a concl....