2019 (8) TMI 71

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....orized Representative Advocate for the Appellant Shri D.R. Gadekar, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. AGS(189-190)138, 142, 148,150,169/2010 dated 22.07.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Aurangabad. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondents are eng....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r (Appeals) has erred in allowing the appeal filed by the respondent observing that the show-cause notice issued earlier on 09.05.2008 included the period January, 2005 to March, 2008, hence the proposed demand notice issued on 05.03.2009 resulted into multiple proceedings for the same facts, therefore, cannot be sustained. Learned AR has further submitted that first show-cause notice dated 9.5.20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be sustained against the respondent is without merit, hence liable to be set aside. He has further submitted that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has only superficially recorded the findings that there is overlapping of demand. In fact, there is no overlapping of demand as the subsequent show-cause notice is based on evidence collected from the specific intelligence and on the basis of statemen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2005 to March, 2008 based on the consumption of electricity and report of Dr. Batra, IIT Kanpur, whereas the second show-cause notice was issued on 5.3.2009 on the basis of visiting to the factory of the respondent on 11.3.2008 by the DGCEI officers and recording statements of the person concerned including buyers/brokers, who have admitted to such clandestine removal and receiving of the MS Ingot....