2012 (8) TMI 1030

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e, for the Appellant. Shri I. Baig, AR, for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : Justice Ajit Bharihoke, President (Oral)]. - This appeal is dismissed against the impugned order in original dated 24-1-2011 whereby Commissioner Adjudication confirmed duty demand to the extent of Rs. 3,06,65,035/- against the appellant with interest and also imposed penalty of equal amount. 2. In the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 20-7-2011. On Hearing dated 27-7-2012, the appellant controverted the allegation of the revenue as such, he was directed to produce proof of deposit of duty demand by 31-8-2012. 6. Today Shri Praveen Sharma, Advocate for the appellant submits that actually against the duty demand of Rs. 3,06,65,035/- confirmed vide impugned order, the appellant has deposited only Rs. 58,28,7811/-. Thus, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....against such decision or order shall, pending the appeal, deposit with the adjudicating authority the duty demanded or the penalty levied : Provided that where in any particular case, the [Commissioner (Appeals)] or the Appellate Tribunal is of opinion that the deposit of duty demanded or penalty levied would cause undue hardship to such person, the [Commissioner (Appeals)] or, as the cas....