Appellate order not vague where remand required verification of dye classification and processing under CBEC clarification.

An appellate order directing verification was not treated as vague or incapable of enforcement where it required factual examination of whether the goods received were formulated, standardised or prepared dyes and whether the processes adopted fell within the CBEC clarification dated 21-4-1993. The remand was viewed as a permissible course because the order identified the matters to be verified with sufficient clarity. The Revenue's objection to the validity of the order was rejected, and the remand-related verification direction was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate authority's order was vague and incapable of enforcement, or whether the matter was rightly remanded for verification of the nature of the dyes received and the processes adopted.

Analysis: The challenge in the appeal was confined to the alleged vagueness of the appellate order. The order was read as requiring verification of two factual matters: whether the goods received were formulated, standardised or prepared dyes, and whether the processes adopted fell within the CBEC clarification dated 21-4-1993. In these circumstances, the order was not treated as meaningless or vague, and remand for verification was found to be a permissible course.

Conclusion: The appellate order was upheld and the Revenue's objection to its validity was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The appeal did not succeed, and the remand-related verification directed by the appellate authority was sustained.

---