Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2015 (10) TMI 1806

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ani, AR For the Respondent : None ORDER Per: H K Thakur: This appeal has been filed by the Revenue with respect to OIA No. RS/28-33/SRT-I/2006 dated 13.02.2007 under which the first appellate authority allowed the appeal filed by the Respondent. 2. The brief facts of the case are that a show cause notice dated 09.12.2005 was issued, inter-alia, to the present Respondent for attachme....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he demand issued after a period of one year, under Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, is not sustainable. 4. Shri Anil Gidwani (AR) appeared on behalf of the Revenue and argued that present appellant has taken over the premises from M/s. Namokar Processors through Gujarat State Financial Corporation. That the present dues, proposed to be recovered by attachment of properties, were pert....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Act, 1944 in view of the Allahabad High Court decision in the case of Rana Girders Limited vs. UOI (supra). 5. Heard the learned AR and perused the case records. It is observed that the reliance placed by the Revenue on an undertaking given by the Respondent in the year 2001 was not properly appreciated by the first appellate authority under which Respondent has clearly agreed to pay the dues p....