1998 (5) TMI 69

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....emkumar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.C. Jain, Member (T)]. - Heard both sides. 2. As a preliminary point ld. Advocate Dr. Samir Chakraborty has pointed out that there are 2 periods involved in the present case which are as follows : 1. 1-3-1982 to 27-2-1986 2. 28-3-1986 to 31-10-1990. He submits that show cause notice itself accepts that the assessment ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Nayak Papers Industries v. Union of India reported in 1991 (56) E.L.T. 31 (Cal.) Tribunal's judgment in the case of Uptron India Ltd. v. CCE, Allahabad reported in 1994 (73) E.L.T. 848. This judgment of Tribunal also refers to as Bombay High Court Judgment in the case of Union of India v. Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Company (P) Ltd. reported in 1989 (44) E.L.T. 3 (Bom.). 3. Ld. Advocate fur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for finalising the provisional assessments and deciding all other issues involved in the matter. 4. Opposing the contentions ld. SDR Shri T. Prem Kumar submits that the question of classification is not involved herein in the impugned order. The show cause notice seeks to finalise provisional assessments in respect of captively used shells and slides and also seeks to demand duty on non-i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....all the issues. The fact that the issues may be at different stages before different authorities is a creation of the authorities action and they cannot take advantage of their own action in the [fate] of the settled position of law. We therefore set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal by remand for   de novo adjudication by the adjudicating authority directing him to finalise ....