2017 (1) TMI 424

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pondent. ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order demanding interest for the intervening period and imposing penalty on the appellant. 2.  The facts of the case are that the appellant was working under the compounded levy scheme during the period of 1999-2000. From 1-3-2000, the rate of duty under compounded levy scheme was increased therefore, the duty liability for the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ch, 2000 itself. On 13-3-2000 and 27-3-2000, the appellant have filed these challans before the authorities below. Without appreciating facts, the authorities below hold that the appellant has paid short-payment and demanded interest for them. It is contention of the ld. Counsel that the appellant has paid excess duty in July, 2002 without verifying the records. In that circumstances, 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

....considered by the adjudicating authority below. Further, I find that no verification was sought by the authorities below for payment made by the appellant on 13-3-2000 and 27-3-2000 to find out whether the appellant has paid the differential duty during the said period or not. In that circumstances, it would be in the interest of justice to set aside impugned order and to remand the matter back to....