2022 (7) TMI 1175

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt for the Appellant Ms. Shivani, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER PER: AJAY SHARMA This appeal has been filed limiting the challenge to the confirmation of the demand of Rs. 15,50,625/- in the Order-in-Original dated 20/04/2021 passed by the Commissioner, CGST, Panchkula. Since rest of the demand raised in the show cause notice dated 08/05/2015 has been dropped by th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the demand of Rs. 15,50,625/- only, with the observation that although the explanation given by the appellant appears to be convincing but neither during the audit nor during the Adjudication proceedings they produced documentary evidence in support of their submission. Learned Chartered Accountant submits that the aforesaid observations/findings by the learned Commissioner is incorrect as the app....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mission. Therefore without going into the merits of the appeal, I am inclined to remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority. But what I gathered from the impugned order is that the documents filed by the appellant on 05.03.2015/13.05.2015 were not available with the Adjudicating Authority, for whatever reason. Therefore, the appellant is directed to file all the relevant documentary evidence ....