1993 (8) TMI 191

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... At the outset of the hearing Shri B.K. Singh raised a preliminary objection that earlier the matter was listed before the Special Bench 'C' and vide order dated 28-7-1989, the matter was transferred to North Regional Bench and thereafter the stay order was passed by the North Regional Bench vide Order No. S-499/89-NRB dated 3-10-1989. Thereafter when the matter came up for hearing before the regular North Regional Bench on 27-9-1991 and after already had arguments at length, the Bench felt that it is a Special Bench matter, Shri Singh pleaded that since one Bench had taken the contrary view and the other Bench also had taken a different view and as such the matter should have been referred to a Larger Bench. Shri Gujral, in reply to the p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d out in the Court)" The matter came up before the North Regional Bench on 27-9-1991 and the Bench vide its order had ordered for transfer of the matter to Special Bench - C. Last para which is very relevant of that order is reproduced below :- "This is a 1989 appeal and since it is a matter and the issue of excisability has already been once considered by the Tribunal, and prima facie that order will have to be considered although it remains open to the department to distinguish the same, we feel that in view of the ratio of the Five Members Bench order mentioned above, the matter may be transferred to the appropriate Special Bench for listing it at an early date." Thereafter, the President vide his order dated 11-10-1991 had orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... matter. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Paras Laminates, reported in 1990 (49) E.L.T. 322 has held as under: "10. That the President has ample power to refer a case to a larger Bench is not in doubt in view of sub-section (5) of Section 129C, which we have set out above. That provision clearly says that in the event of the members of a Bench differing in opinion on any point, and the members are equally divided, the case shall be referred to the President for hearing on any such point by one or more of the members of the Tribunal, and such point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the members. 11. It is true that sub-section (5) refers to difference of opinion arising amongst members of....