TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 517
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... : A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Krishna Agrawal ORDER Heard Sri A.P. Mathur, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Krishna Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the order of the CESTAT dated 14.2.2008 by which the order of appellate authority as well as the assessing authority has been confirmed by which the seized goods of the appellant have been c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....remises of the petitioner was inspected by the Central Excise Preventive Branch on 29/30.3.2004. During the course of the inspection, the stock of finished goods and the stock of cenvatable goods were physically verified. On such verification and comparison of the stock of finished goods, a shortage of 3732.86 kgs was found in the stock of the finished goods and some other varieties of finished g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vant date serve a notice on the person chargeable with the duty requiring him to show cause why he should not pay the amount specified in the notice. Sub-section 2 B of Section 11 A provides that where any duty or excise has not been levied or paid a person chargeable with such duty may pay the amount of duty on the basis of his own ascertainment or on the basis of duty ascertained by the Central....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... A perusal of the show cause notice reveals that it is not notice under Section 11 (A) (1) of the Act for the realization of the duty rather it is a notice for the confiscation of the seized goods and for the imposition of the penalty. This is quite distinct from a notice under Section 11 (A) (1) of the Act. The aforesaid notice does not contain any provision of law under which it has been issue....