https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97528 An adjudication order was found deficient because the duty for the subsequent period was not quantified in the order itself and was left for later calculation by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner. The authority was expected to specify the demand in a self-contained speaking order and deal with the appellants' submissions after granting a hearing. As the demand remained unquantified even after a substantial lapse of time, the matter required re-examination by the jurisdictional Commissioner of Central Excise and was remanded for passing a fresh speaking order in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 11 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 11:31:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97528 An adjudication order was found deficient because the duty for the subsequent period was not quantified in the order itself and was left for later calculation by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner. The authority was expected to specify the demand in a self-contained speaking order and deal with the appellants' submissions after granting a hearing. As the demand remained unquantified even after a substantial lapse of time, the matter required re-examination by the jurisdictional Commissioner of Central Excise and was remanded for passing a fresh speaking order in accordance with law. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 11 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97528