1999 (3) TMI 589

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Appellants. Shri M.M. Dubey, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : G.R. Sharma, Member (T)]. -  These are 3 appeals filed by 3 different parties. Since in all these 3 appeals the issue is the same, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The issue relates to determination of the annual production capacity in terms of Section 3A of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... duty under sub-rule 96ZO(3) cannot claim the benefit of sub-section 4 of Section 3A. 3.  We have heard Shri J.S. Agarwal, ld. Advocate who submits that an identical issue came up for decision before the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Minakashi Castings; that the Tribunal in its Final Order Nos. A/85-86/99-NB, dated 15-1-1999 held that "According to department this right cannot be extended t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....way of remand." 4. Shri M.M. Dubey, ld. JDR submits that there was another case of V.K. which was heard by the Tribunal and the order was yet to be out. He submits that the other Bench may or may not take the same view as in the present case. He, therefore prays that a different view is possible and the appeal may be kept pending. 5.  We have heard the rival submissions. We find that th....