2006 (3) TMI 605

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i K.S. Bhatt, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. -  This appeal has been filed against Order No. 33/2004, dated 30-9-2004 passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Hyderabad-I Commissionerate consequent to Final Order No. 1310/2002, dated 7-10-2002. This issue had already come before the Tribunal twice. In the Final Order dated 7-10-2002, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....For the second time, the Tribunal remanded the matter to decide the issue keeping in mind the observations of the Tribunal in its first order. On going through the impugned order, we find that the adjudicating authority has completely ignored the observations of the Tribunal and proceeded to re-determine the capacity. He has made an observation that the proceedings of the BIFR are not relevant for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... supra. She urged that the adjudicating authority passed the order completely ignoring the directions of the Tribunal. Hence, she requested to allow payment of duty on the basis of the actual production. The following case-laws were also relied on :- (i)      S.G. Multicast Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Jamshedpur - 2002 (145) E.L.T. 315 (Tri.- Kolkata) (ii)    Na....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....airman, CBEC to allow them make payment on the basis of the actual production. It is also on record that the appellants' unit was closed w.e.f. 18-11-1997. The duty payment in the present case is to be decided only for the period from 1-9-1997 to 17-11-1997. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court, the adjudicating authority ought to have allowed the request of the appella....