2008 (11) TMI 1

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....all decide upon the notice in accordance with law, after considering the submissions that the appellant may make." 2.  Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are as follows (a)   The Collector vide his order dated 23-3-1993 confirmed demand of duty amounting to Rs. 5,72,852.29 as per. the proposal contained in a show cause notice dated 21-3-91 demanding duty from the appellant on solvent CIX and xylene which were received by the appellant without payment of duty in terms of Notification No. 76/67. The demand was confirmed on the ground that the materials have been diverted without having been used for the intended purpose. Penalties were also imposed. (b)  On appeal by the party, the Tribunal set ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Ld. SDR submits that the Addl. Commissioner adjudicated the matter as during the relevant time the powers of adjudication by the Addl. Comnisioner has been enhanced by the CBEC. Though adjudication was done by Addl. Commissioner, on appeal by the party, the matter has also been considered. at the level of Comissioner (in this case Commissioner (Appeals)) and the decision of the Original Authority has been endorsed. He relies on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of ABI international v. Addl. CC (Imports), Chennai [ 2004(164) E.L.T. 18 (Mad.)] to support his contention "de novo enquiry means that entire trial should be held for second time or new hearing hearing of the second time should be held in the same manner....