2006 (8) TMI 592

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Bipin Verma, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER The Hon'ble Registrar has referred this matter under an impression that there is a conflict of opinion on the issue relating to filing of one appeal on the basis of number of order- in-appeal. In his opinion, since it was held in the decisions in Ekantika Copier [1991 (56) E.L.T. 350 (Tribunal)] and in M.I. Metal Sec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., there is no need to prefer as many appeals as there were SCNs. The larger bench held as under :- "The observations of the Apex Court in Narahari & Others case appears to lend support (though indirectly) to the contention of the assessees before us that once a judicial or quasi-judicial authority passes a compendious order disposing of a number of SCNs, for purposes of filing appeal as higher au....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... single appeal before the Tribunal from the order of the Commissioner or the Commissioner (Appeals), as the case may be, from a single order disposing of more than one SCN. We are therefore unable to agree with the majority opinion in Ekantika Copiers case and the SRB decision in M.I. Metal Sections case. We are in agreement with the view taken in the Alliance Mills case that one Appeal to the Tri....