2007 (3) TMI 138

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s been filed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 61/99 (H-I) Central Excise dated 7-5-1999 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Hyderabad. 2. Even though the OIA is dated 7-5-1999, the appeal has been preferred only on 5-2-2007. Thus, there is enormous delay of nearly 8 years in filing the appeal. An affidavit has been filed by the appellant narrating the sequence of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Rs. 1,00,000/-. The appellant requested the Commissioner (A) on 22-6-2004 for fixing the hearing. They reminded the Commissioner (A) on 8-10-2004, 10-10-2006 and 20-10-2006 and 12-10-2006 to furnish attested order copy along with proof of service of order, as the same has not been received by the petitioner company. In spite of reminders, the petitioner company could not obtain the copy of the ord....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s accepted, there is no question of any delay as the appeal was preferred on 5-2-2007. The COD application is disposed of in the above manner. Therefore, the stay application and appeal are required to be taken up for decision by this Bench. 3. Shri L.N. Goyal, learned Consultant who appeared for the appellants urged that as the appellant company was permanently closed with effect from 30-9-199....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... trimming, cutting and turning and making the rough rolls suitable for rolling machines. The above processes do not amount to manufacture and therefore, no duty liability rests with the appellant nor there is any need to reverse Modvat credit. Assuming these activities amount to manufacture, the appellants are entitled for benefit of Notification No. 217/86 and 67/95 dated 16- 3-1995 (Captive cons....