https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43943 Where the Tribunal found no material to show that Morgen Dew Laboratory was the appellant-unit's loan licensee, the Court noted that two documents-a Form 28-A licence under Rule 76-A and a renewal letter-were said to have been produced but did not appear in the Tribunal's order, and only one was referred to in a Collector's order. The proper course was for the appellant to place those documents formally before the Tribunal by application, so their evidentiary value could be considered afresh and appropriate orders passed. The appeals were dismissed with directions to pursue that course before the Tribunal. en-us Fri, 16 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Jun 2010 10:23:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43943 Where the Tribunal found no material to show that Morgen Dew Laboratory was the appellant-unit's loan licensee, the Court noted that two documents-a Form 28-A licence under Rule 76-A and a renewal letter-were said to have been produced but did not appear in the Tribunal's order, and only one was referred to in a Collector's order. The proper course was for the appellant to place those documents formally before the Tribunal by application, so their evidentiary value could be considered afresh and appropriate orders passed. The appeals were dismissed with directions to pursue that course before the Tribunal. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 16 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43943