Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2017 (8) TMI 699

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by claiming that paper manufactured by them contain not less than 75% by weight of pulp from materials other than bamboo, hardwood, softwood, reeds or rags. It appeared to the department that the actual weight of pulp of materials other than excluded category was below the percentage stipulated. After scrutiny of Stock Preparation Log Books the department took a view that part of the paper cleared by appellant had been manufactured out of less than 75% by weight of such stipulated material. Department also alleged that the readings with regard to composition of pulp was manipulated by the appellant. In the first round of adjudication, differential duty of Rs. 1.65 crores along with interest thereon was demanded from the appellants. On appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vidence. 90 out of 225 entries in the log book were, admittedly, not manipulated. In the circumstances, we are of the view that a finding of manipulation of records by the appellants is unwarranted in this case. 7. For the reason noted above, we set aside the impugned order and allow this appeal by way of remand, directing the learned Commissioner to examine, in terms of this order, the eligibility of the appellants for the benefit of the relevant Notifications after giving them an effective opportunity of being heard." 2. In denovo adjudication, vide impugned order dated 12.8.2008, the differential duty demand was limited to Rs. 4,24,921/- and the remaining amount of Rs. 1,60,98,643/- was dropped. Penalty equal to the duty determined....