2019 (5) TMI 1867

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Kackria, Advocate Present for the Respondent: Shri G.M.Sharma, AR ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the demand of duty of Rs. 63,38,455/- has been confirmed along with interest and equivalent amount of penalty also imposed on them account clandestine removal of the goods. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a manufacturer of prefab....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was adjudicated, the demand of duty along with interest confirmed and equivalent amount of penalty was also imposed. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has affirmed the order of the adjudicating authority. Against the said order, the appellant is before us. 3. Ld. Counsel appeared on behalf of the appellant submits after issuance of show cause notice, the appellant asked to provide copy of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by the Revenue for alleging clandestine removal of the goods against the appellant, therefore, the demand is not sustainable. On merits, he submits that to allege clandestine removal of the goods, no investigation was conducted by the Revenue to allege clandestine removal of the goods. No statement of any person recorded to allege clandestine removal of the goods, therefore, the demand is not sust....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ating authority is not having the said production slip in their record to allege clandestine removal of the goods. In these circumstances, if the matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority for re-adjudication, the same will not serve any purpose as the production slip was resumed in 2009 and we are running in 2019 in terms of the decision of the decision of this Tribunal in the case of ....