2016 (4) TMI 770

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wdhury, Supdt.(AR) ORDER PER SHRI H.K.THAKUR. This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant against Order-in-Appeal No.28/HAL/2012 dated 05.06.2012 under which Commissioner(Appeal-I) of Central Excise, Kolkata, as First Appellate Authority, upheld the Order-in-Original dated 18.11.2009 passed by the Adjudicating Authority. 2. Shri Deepro Sen (Advocate) appearing on behalf of the Appellan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iled on the grounds that there is no provision for filing a revised ER-1 return. In reply to a specific query of the Bench the Ld.Advocate also could not bring to the notice of the Bench any provisions under which such revised ER-1 can be filed. 3. Shri K.Chowdhury, Supdt.(AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that there is no provision for filing a revised ER-1 return and Appellant was....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....edings is whether Appellant can defy payments of its own assessment done in the ER-1 and does not pay the entire duty assessed by him. Instead Appellant filed a revised ER-1 return to argue that duty payable was actually less than what was calculated in the ER-1 return. No provision of the Central Excise law has been brought to the notice of the Bench whether any such adjustment can be done in the....