TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (10) TMI 424
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., it was found that these two common Orders-in-Appeal dealt with as many as thirty Orders by the Original Authority. Hence, the Department subsequently filed 28 more Appeals accompanied by 28 Miscellaneous Applications for condonation of delay. In view of the fact that the main Appeals were filed in time, the respondents have no objection to take the additional Appeals on record and accordingly, we allow all the 28 Miscellaneous Applications for condonation of delay. 3. We find that the Department has filed two extra Miscellaneous Applications for condonation of delay and two extra Appeals which are infructuous and the same are dismissed as not necessary. 4. The learned D.R., Shri A.K. Sharma states that the Department has engag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....intendent that pipes required for delivery of water only upto first storage facilities will be eligible for exemption, whereas the Notification does not talk about the first storage facilities. In fact, the Notification has been amended subsequently with effect from 1-3-07, specifying therein that pipes needed for delivery of water to the first storage point only would be eligible for exemption, as also pipes of outer diameter exceeding 20 cms. Learned Advocate states that presently, the Respondents are getting exemption for pipes of all dimensions for delivery of water to the first storage point and also for pipes exceeding the diameter of 20 cms. for delivery of water beyond the first storage point. He says that since the amendments have ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... at the first, second and third stage. He also states that there are number of decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court supporting the settled position that singular includes the plural. 7. Heard the learned J.D.R., Shri A.K. Sharma assisted by Shri U.B. Rakhe, Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-III Commissionerate. He supports the arguments given in the Grounds of Appeal filed by the Department. He states that the lower Appellate Authority has passed the impugned Orders taking the letters of the Superintendent as appellable orders, whereas the Superintendent had merely communicated the Order arising out the Asstt. Commissioner's decision and there was no adjudication prior to issue of such letters and hence, the letters should....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eeded for delivery of water from the plant to the storage facilities. Secondly, we find that the Notification merely talks about the storage facilities and there is no restriction that the water should be delivered only to the first storage point, as has been provided in the amended Notification with effect from 1-3-07. It is obvious that the unamended Notification would have to be interpreted to cover the impugned pipes which were needed to deliver water not only to the first storage point but also to the second and subsequent storage point, such as elevated storage reservoirs where the water was further treated for chlorination. If it was the intention of the Government to restrict the exemption for pipes upto first storage point, the Not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cise Act, 1944, any person aggrieved by any decision or Order passed under the Act by a Central Excise Officer lower in rank than the Commissioner can appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals). Since in the instant case, the Superintendent is a Central Excise Officer lower in rank than the Commissioner and he had communicated the decision/order not to effect clearance availing exemption, the Respondents in this case were, inter alia, aggrieved by his decision/order so communicated and in our view, the lower Appellate Authority was right in entertaining the Appeal against such communication. 9. As regards the third ground taken by the Department that exemption Notification should have been strictly construed on the basis of the language use....