2019 (3) TMI 28

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aran, Asst. Commissioner, AR For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 30.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal of the appellant. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is a manufacturer of Sponge Iron falling under Chapter 72 of CETA, 1944. During....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....osed equal penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (A) who rejected the same. Hence, this appeal. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. 4. Ld. Counsel for the appellants submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the law. He further subm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ot considered on the ground that the same was not produced before the Original Authority. Further, the Commissioner (A) has observed that this evidence cannot be considered at the appellate stage as the same has not been produced before the Original Authority. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. AR defended the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of....