2019 (4) TMI 723

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ai, Supdt. AR for respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra 1. This is an appeal filed against -in-Appeal No.SB/98/Th-I/2011 dated 28/02/2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of man made and cotton fabrics falling under Chapter 52, 54 and 55 of CETA, 1985. During the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issioner (Appeals), who in turn rejected their appeal. Hence, the present appeal. 3. At the outset, learned Advocate for the appellant submits that while confirming the demand even though they have specifically pleaded before the adjudicating authority and placed evidences to the effect that out of three stenters, one stenters was permanently closed for repair during the relevant period and hen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....account the closed non-working stenter and also without allowing abatement for the closure period of the said stenters solely on the ground that formal application seeking abatement has not been filed by the appellant. Also, from the records, we find that the adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand and imposed penalty without affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant. In these c....