2017 (2) TMI 1261

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....A, for the Appellant. Shri Sanjay Hasija, Supdt. (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER The brief facts of these cases are that in the application for abatement dated 19-4-2000, the Jurisdictional Commissioner vide Order No. 15/CEX/07, dated 8-5-2007 passed following order : (a)     I hereby confirm the duty amount of Rs. 11,69,175/- under Rule 96ZP(3) of Central Excise Ru....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appellant, Commissioner confirmed the demand under Rule 96ZP(3) imposed penalty of equal amount under Rule 96ZP(3) demanded interest under Rule 96ZP(3). However no order was passed as regard the abatement claim by them in their application though it was discussed in the findings for this reason order passed in respect of abatement of the duty is not sustainable and same deserve to be set aside. H....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Aurangabad [2008 (225) E.L.T. 189 (Bom.)] (b)     Triveni Alloys Ltd. v. CESTAT, Chennai [2014 (306) E.L.T. 617 (Mad.)]. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the record. 5. I find that abatement application was filed on 19-4-2000 whereas demands under show cause notices were adjudicated on 30-9-2003 without passing a....