2000 (10) TMI 390

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d, Advocate, for the Appellant. Dr. Ravinder Babu, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. - The above appeal arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise who has confirmed a duty demand of Rs. 69,59,384/- on fancy/special yarn manufactured by the appellants herein during the period 1992-93 to 1994-95, as a result of its classification unde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....31-1-97 for demand of duty of Rs. 69,59,383.12, answerable to the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh, was included inadvertently due to clerical mistake in the list of show cause notices covered by the adjudication order dated 29-1-98. The corrigendum stated that the said show cause notice dated 31-1-97 is deleted from the list of cases decided vide Order-in-Original No. 22-27 dated 29-1-9....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....red by different assessees including the appellants, under Chapter 51, thereby confirming the adjudication order No. 22-27 dated 29-1-98 in the case of the appellants. In this scenario, the submission of the appellants that the present demand is not sustainable since it has already been set aside by the Assistant Commissioner vide earlier order dated 29-1-98 and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeal'....