Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd. vs C.C.E., Jaipur on 20 April, 2001
ORDER K.K. Bhatia, Member (T)
1. In this case, the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs & Central Excise, Jaipur vide his Order dt. 9.10.2000 was rejected the appeal of the party without going into its merits by following his earlier Order-in-Appeal No. 232(KDT)CE/JPR/2000 dt. 3.3.2000, passed by him in the case of same appellants.
2. Today when the matter is called, Shri N.P. Srivastava, Asst. Manager (Excise) of the appellant party submits that the above said Order dt. 3.3.2000 of Commissioner (Appeals) has since been set aside by the CEGAT vide its Final Order No. A/81/2001/NB/DB dt. 31.1.2001 and the matter remanded to the Addl. Commissioner for passing a fresh order. He therefore, requests that this matter may also be remanded to the concerned authority who is already seized of the Shortage/Excess Intimation Note (SEIN) and the relevant gate passes covering the period under dispute. Shri S. Kumar, JDR for the respondents has no objection.
3. I have considered these submissions. As rightly contended by the ld. Representative of the respondents, the present appeal is against the Order dt. 9.10.2000 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur who has simply followed his earlier Order dt. 3.3.2000 and dismissed the appeal of the party without going into the merits of the same.
4. The earlier Orders dt. 3.3.2000 of Commissioner (Appeals) has already been set aside vide Order dt. 31.1.2001 of the CEGAT and the matter remanded to the Addl. Commissioner for passing a fresh order. I grant Stay to the appellants and set aside the order appealed against and remand the matter to the Addl. Commissioner for de-novo consideration on the terms and conditions as directed in the aforestated Final Order dt. 31.1.2001 of the Tribunal.
5. The appeal is thus allowed by remand in the above terms.
(Announced and dictated in the Court)