2011 (10) TMI 390

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ration are that the appellant herein had manufactured excisable goods and were dispatching the same without issuing sales bills or accounting the same in any way in their regular accounts. It was noticed that the appellant had manufactured and illicitly cleared the excisable goods valued at Rs. 73,37,395/-. Various statements were recorded, which indicate that there was clandestine removal of the goods. Statement from the buyers also indicates that the goods they received were cleared by the main party, without payment of duty. The adjudicating authority had confirmed the demand on the main party and also imposed penalties on various parties, including the main party. Adjudicating authority also demanded interest from the main appellant. Ag....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....earned Commissioner (Appeals). Learned SDR would submit that the issue involved in this case is of clandestine removal. The question of granting to the assessee the benefit of cum-duty price does not arise. He would also submit that the appellant is to be penalised under Section 11AC, as he did not discharge the duty liability when the same was adjudged by the adjudicating authority.  It is his submission that learned Commissioner (Appeals) could not have remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority for reconsidering the issue of imposition of penalties on the various other persons, as the law prohibits him for remanding the matter back to the adjudicating authority. 5. We have considered the submissions made at length by bo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ctfully following the same, we direct the appellant to pay 25% of he amount of duty arrived at by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in Para 10 along with interest on the said amount, within 30 days from the receipt of this order. 8. As regards Revenue's appeal, we find that Revenue is correct in contending before us that personal penalties have been set-aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) without giving any valid reasons and has remanded it to the adjudicating authority. On perusal of the order of adjudicating authority, we also find that learned adjudicating authority has not passed a well reasoned order for imposition of penalties on other persons.  In our considered view, learned Commissioner (Appeals) was correct in remanding bac....