2015 (7) TMI 964

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Sr. Adv. & Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. & Ms. Nisha Bagchi, Adv. & Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. & Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. J.S. Sinha, Adv. &Mr. B.K. Mishra, Adv. & Mr. Vikas Malhotra, Adv. & Mr. M.P. Sahay, Adv. & Ms. Aparna Jha,Adv. & Mr. Siddhartha Arya, Adv. & Ms. Manjula Gupta,Adv. ORDER In the present case, show cause notice was issued by the Assistant Commissioner,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lso ordered for confiscation of land, building, plant and machinery of the respondent No.1 under Rule 173Q (2) of the Rules with an option to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 5,00,000/-. This order-in-original passed by the Commissioner was challenged in appeal before the CESTAT. The CESTAT by the impugned order dated 04.03.2005 has allowed both the appeals filed by the respond....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....judicating authority has not recorded any findings or discussed any evidence in support of the confirmation of demand. Mr. Arjit Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the appellants has taken us through the order passed by the adjudicating authority on the aforesaid issue. Following discussion is contained in the order of the adjudicating  authority:- "The second issue for determination be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iven by the adjudicating authority in confirming the demand. Thus, we do not agree with the findings of the CESTAT that adjudicating authority has not given any reasons or discussed the evidence. When there was no repetition of the material and the evidence mentioned in the show cause notice by the respondent No.1 it was not necessary to discuss the same on that account and this course was adopted....