Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. Learned Authorised Representative contends that the seizure of the goods and its liability for duty are beyond controversy with the admission of duty liability by recourse to the scheme in Finance Act, 2019. It is also contended that the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in re Bansal Steel Corporation & Ors is inapplicable as the dispute arose in the context of issue of fake invoices without E/350 & 351/2011 involvement of transportation of goods. On the contrary he has cited a number of decisions of the Tribunal, viz., Wipro Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad 92006 (196) ELT 226 (Tri.-Mumbai)], Paragon Steels (P) Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Calicut [2018 (15) GSTL 298 (Tri.Bang.)], Mytri Enterprises v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai [2004 (174) ELT 389 (Tri.- Mumbai)] and Vishan Shamlal Milwani v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad [2006 (202) ELT 90 (Tri.-Mumbai)].