2014 (3) TMI 741

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant. Shri I. Ahmed, SDR, for the Respondent. ORDER After hearing both sides duly represented by Shri K.I. Vyas, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant and Shri I. Ahmed, ld. SDR, appearing for the Revenue, we find that the appellant is a 100% EOU. They cleared the rejects of textured/twisted yarn and waste of yarn in Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) during the period June, 2001 to September....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....udicating authority was appealed against before Commissioner (Appeals). As per the observations made by Commissioner (Appeals), the appellant accepted their duty liability and did not dispute the same. However, they contended that this is not a case of imposition of penalty inasmuch as there was no wilful suppression on their part to evade payment of duty and the demand had arisen due to change in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... being Order No. A/1341/WZB/AHD/2008, dated 9-7-2008, vide which, by following the Tribunal's decision in the case of Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., the appeal filed by the Revenue was rejected. 5. Countering the arguments. ld. SDR submits that the duty was never challenged by Commissioner (Appeals), as is clear from the observations made by the appellate authority. As such, he submits that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... it fit, in the interest of justice, to allow the appeal last to raise the ground challenging confirmation of duty. We note that the issue stand decided in the case of Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. referred supra. The said decision of the Tribunal stand followed subsequently in number of other decisions. Reference to one such judgment can be made in the case of C.C.E. v. Mudra Texturising Pvt. Ltd. ....