2007 (11) TMI 161

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No. AT/38/RGD/2007, dated 13-2-2007. 2. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. 3. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order-in-original that confirmed the demand and also imposed penalty on the appellant. 4. It was alleged and upheld by the adjudicating authority that the appellant had violated the provisions of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sioner (Appeals) order is incorrect. 6. On perusal of the record, it is seen that the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the impugned order of the following finds:-  "I have gone through the case records and considered the averments made in the appeal. The lower authority has confirmed the demand on the ground that the Development Commissioner has accepted the fact that the appellants....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uty, though under protest in respect of these capital goods. It is clear from the order of the Development Commissioner, that the proceedings were dropped on merits as well as in consideration of the fact of payment of duty under protest. The dropping of the demand, which had levelled allegation of procurement of goods without express approval of Development Commissioner means that the charges ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s without permission and on adjudication the charges levelled have been dropped. It is seen that the charge of getting capital goods without permission of Development Commissioner was condoned by the Development Commissioner and as such, there cannot be any infraction on this count. To my mind, the Commissioner (Appeals) finding are correct and does not require any interference as the issue of cap....