2018 (3) TMI 98

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Respondent ORDER Per: Dr. Satish Chandra 1. The present appeal is against Order-in-Original 37/2007 dated 12/08/2017. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is 100 per cent EOU and engaged in manufacture of Wool Tops, All Wool and Wool Silk Yarns. The factory was searched on 26/04/2006 to 08/05/2006. On the basis of stock verification of the goods, the department has made ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant has filed the present appeal. 4. With this background we heard Shri Jitin Singhal, Ld. Advocate for the appellant and Shri H.C. Saini, Ld. DR for the Revenue. It is evident that the case was remanded two times. This time, the Original Authority has passed the following order:- 8.7. At Sl. No.1 of the Annexure- 'W', the party have referred to 'production slip No.1002' but no such producti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to this effect is produced at the time of re-adjudication. Thus, the total quantity of yarn mentioned as 7,16,817 kgs in the Annexure-W is not acceptable. 5. During the course of arguments, Jitin Singhal, Ld. Advocate for the appellant submits that all the documents discussed above have already been submitted before the Adjudicating Authority. He has drawn the attention of the Ld. Representati....