2008 (5) TMI 566

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., JDR, for the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President]. - Against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, by which he dropped proceedings initiated under show cause notice dated 22-5-2000 for recovery of duty from M/s. Eagle Engg. Works, and M/s. Kay Iron Works Pvt. Ltd. and for imposition of penalty on them as well as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... case, aforesaid OIO was in respect of more than one person. However, the aggrieved person was department only. Therefore, on the belief that only one appeal is to be filed, this office vide letter of even number dated 5-7-2002 submitted the appeal memorandum along with paper book within time limit. 3. However, the CESTAT during the hearing on 28-2-2008 observed that the department can not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 6. In the case of M/s. Anant Spg. Mills v. CCE, Bhopal reported in 2006 (197) E.L.T. 112 (Tri.-Del.) vide Misc. Order No. 286/2005-EX(PB) dated 5-9-2005, condoned the delay of 292 days in filing appeal." 2. Although, there is a request for adjournment on behalf of the three respondents, we decline to grant the request as we find that it is not necessary to keep the present applicatio....