M\/s. Mars Plywood Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST & CX
Central Excise
2018 (10) TMI 833 – CALCUTTA HIGH COURT – TMI
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 11-10-2018
CEXA 55 of 2018, GA 825 of 2018, GA 826 of 2018
Central Excise
I. P. MUKERJI AND AMRITA SINHA JJ.
\nAppearance:
\nMr. P. K. Das, Adv. Mr. C. K. Dutta, Adv. Mr. Rohan Sengupta, Adv. For the appellant
\nMr. Somnath Ganguli, Adv. Mr. Sudipta Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Sabnam Basu, Adv. For the respondent
\nRe : GA 825 of 2018
\nThe Court: Sufficient cause is shown. The delay in preferring the appeal is condoned. Let this appeal be registered by the department forthwith.
\nThe application (GA 825 of 2018) is allowed.
\nRe: GA 826 of 2018, CEXA 55 of 2018:
\nThis is an<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n of Rs. 2, 45, 850.09\/- along with interest and penalty of Rs. 4, 00, 292.00\/- has been wrongly imposed on the appellant by the respondent authority by rejecting their argument that this stock of unlabelled and unstamped plywood was to be entered in the Daily Stock Account and accounted for. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n urt is of the view that these questions of fact and law can be best answered by the tribunal or the adjudicating authorities below. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s. Mars Plywood Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST & CXCentral Excise2018 (10) TMI 833 – CALCUTTA HIGH COURT – TMICALCUTTA HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 11-10-2018CEXA 55 of 2018, GA 825 of 2018, GA 826 of 2018 Central ExciseI. P. MUKERJI AND AMRITA SINHA JJ. Appearance: Mr. P. K. Das, Adv. Mr. C. K. … Continue reading “M\/s. Mars Plywood Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST & CX”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14501","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14501","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=14501"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14501\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=14501"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=14501"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=14501"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nMr. Das said that according to the respondent such entry should be ignored and was ignored by them.
\nLearned counsel appearing for the respondent Commissioner submitted that at all stages of the proceeding, the adjudicating bodies have come to the conclusion that the appellant was guilty of clandestine removal of the goods for the purpose of evasion of duty.
\nOn a bare perusal of the records of this case, we find that there was a stock of unlabelled an<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nIn those circumstances, we formally admit the appeal.
\nBy consent of the parties, we have heard it out dispensing with all formalities. Instead of hearing out this appeal on questions of law, it would be proper if the above issues are remanded back to the Tribunal for de novo adjudication upon hearing the parties within four months from the date of communication of this order. We order accordingly.
\nThe Tribunal will be at liberty to further remand the matter to a lower over adjudicating authority for fact finding purposes.
\nThe Tribunal will not be bound by any observation made herein.
\nAs affidavits were not<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n