TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (5) TMI 439
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. - This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned order-in-appeal dated 16-10-2001 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of door lock assembly of motor vehicles and are also availing Modvat credit facility. They received purchase orders from M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra for the sup....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....period of limitation was also proposed to be invoked against them as they suppressed the receipt of these amounts from the Excise department. The Additional Commissioner who adjudicated the show cause notice, dropped the demand of Rs. 49,576/- in respect of the advances received from M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra, but confirmed demand of Rs. 1,14,407/- regarding advances received from M/s. TELCO and im....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....udicating authority has very elaborately dealt with the issue and fairly enough, but how and in what manner, has not discussed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. The impugned order passed by him is non-speaking and deserves to be set aside on this ground alone. 5. The learned Counsel has also referred to the case law on the issue involved in the present appeal, referred to ....