TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 1456
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellant Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, Deputy Commissioner Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER PER: ARCHANA WADHWA After hearing both the sides duly represented by Shri Subham Agarwal, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant and learned Authorized Representative Shri Gyanendra Kumar Singh, Deputy Commissioner appearing for the revenue, we find that the appellants are engaged....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing demand of duty to the extent of Rs. 24,97,545/- for the period 2011-12 to 2014-15. The notice alleged that the trolleys manufactured by the appellant and cleared from the factory cannot be held to be captively consumed so as to extend the benefit of the notification in question. The said show cause notice culminated into an order passed by the Original Adjudicating Authority confirming the dem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ocuring the same from others, in which case no duty liability would fall upon them. It is seen that the said issue was raised before the lower authorities but Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the appellant could not produce the record as there was a major fire accident in their factory and various excisable records were destroyed. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been audited during the year 2011-12 and 2013-14 and no objection was raised. The said fact strength and their bonafide belief that the trolleys do not attract any duty of excise. We note that apart from the fact that the audit had earlier taken place in the assessee factory during the period 2011-12 to 2013-14, the present proceedings also stands initiated on the basis of the records maintained....