2014 (4) TMI 1146

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri Sudhir Malhotra, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER: Both the appeals filed by the Revenue are being disposed of by a common order as their arise out of the same impugned order of authorities. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellants have been engaged in the manufacture of Non-alloy steel ingots falling under Chapter 72 of the Schedule to the Central Excise ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... vide impugned order-in-original confirmed the demand for duty and imposed equal amount of penalty on both the appellants and also demanded interest. 3. On appeal against above order Commissioner (Appeals) took into consideration the assessees contentions that they had neither increased the capacity of their furnace nor manufactured/removed any steel ingots without accountal and without payment....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... above explanation. He also observed that the revenue has not conducted any verification or investigation as to from whom the assessee procured raw material to manufacture such huge quantity of ingots and as to whom the same has been sold. He accordingly set aside the appellant. 5. The revenue in their present appeal has not been able to introduce any evidence to show the clandestine manufactur....