Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Cce, Jalandhar vs M/S Speedway Rubber Factory on 18 November, 2009

        

 
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
West Block No.2, R. K. Puram, New Delhi
COURT-III


Excise Appeal No. 927 of 2006-Ex. Br.

[Arising out of order-in-Appeal No. 854-56/CE/Appl/CHD/2004 dated 31.12.2004 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs & Central Excise, Chandigarh]


CCE, Jalandhar                                                               Appellant
		 	                 
Vs.

M/s Speedway Rubber Factory                                      Respondent 

Appearance:

Appeared for Appellant    :    Shri Mahesh Rastogi, DR	                                                                      
Appeared for Respondent:     None

 
Date of Hearing: 18.11.2009

   CORAM:HONBLE MR. M. VEERAIYAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER
                HONBLE MR. D.N. PANDA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

  
                    
    Order No.dated.

Per D.N. Panda :

Revenue has come in Appeal being aggrieved by the order passed by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) on 31.12.2004 allowing the Appeal of the Respondent before him. The Respondent is absent today on call. Ld. DR on behalf of Revenue submits that when show cause notice in para-2 has brought out the cause of action that needs scrutiny by the ld. Appellate Authority on the strength of order of the Adjudication. The Revenue finds support from the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of CCE Vs. Rukmani Pakkwall Traders reported in 2004 (165) ELT 481.

2. Heard Revenue.

3. In absence of the Respondent, it would not be proper to dispose the matter unilaterally. Having noticed that some peculiar facts are coming out from show-cause notice that needs scrutiny on the basis of the judgement of the Apex Court. It would be proper to send the matter to the ld. Commissioner who shall do well to afford opportunity of hearing to both sides and dispose the matter afresh by a reasoned and speaking order granting fair opportunity of defence.

4. In the result, the Appeal is remanded to the ld. Appellate Authority.

(Dictated & pronounced in open Court) (M. VEERAIYAN) TECHNICAL MEMBER (D.N. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER RM