2001 (3) TMI 690
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Shri A.R. Madhav Rao, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. - This order will dispose of two appeals; A. No. E/2365/2000-C filed against the order dated 28-4-2000 and A. No. E/2366/2000-C filed against the order dated 20-4-2000 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Both these appeals have been filed by the Revenue being dissatisfied with those orders of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e matter must be sent back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for re-examining the matter. 3. In reply the learned counsel, Shri A.R. Madhav Rao, has not disputed that in the impugned order dated 28-4-2000 the Commissioner (Appeals) has not recorded any finding about the availability of benefit of Notification No. 15/94-C.E., dated 1-3-1994 to the respondents in respect of the goods in question....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Appeals) in the impugned order, has neither recorded any findings about the classification of the goods in question which according to the ! Revenue were covered by Tariff Heading No. 39.15 nor regarding the applicability or non-applicability of the Notification No. 15/94-C.E., dated 1-3-1994, the benefit of which had been sought by the respondents. He has affirmed the order-in-original of the As....
TaxTMI