2023 (6) TMI 582

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri M. Kannan, Learned Advocate for the Appellant Smt. Anandalakshmi Ganeshram, Learned Superintendent for the Respondent ORDER : Per Hon'ble Mrs. Sulekha Beevi C.S. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of "Tread Rubber" used in the retreading industry. On verification of the accounts, by the Department, it was found that the appellant had n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... penalties. Aggrieved by such order, the appellant is now before the Tribunal. 3.1 Shri M. Kannan, Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, submitted that though the Tribunal had, in the first round of litigation, given a specific direction to extend the cum-duty benefit to the appellant, the Commissioner has denied the same in the de novo proceedings. He pointed out that in paragraph 10 of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pondent submitted that they have no objection as to the calculation of demand arrived at by the appellant after taking into account the cum-duty benefit. The Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that after extending the cum-duty benefit, the total duty payable by them would be Rs.3,69,606/-. 6. After hearing both sides, we are of the opinion that when the Tribunal had given a specific di....