2016 (4) TMI 105

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....palakrishna Gokhaley For the Respondent : Sudhir Kumar ORDER PER SRI G. CHANDRAIAH This appeal, at the instance of Revenue, is directed against the order dated 09.02.2005 passed by CESTAT, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore. 2. Aggrieved by the order in O.R.No.6/2000 (de novo) dated 25.06.2003, passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Guntur, holding the respondent liable to pay 8% o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sought to argue that the respondent-Corporation is engaged in the manufacture and clearances of Sulphuric Acid falling under Chapter Sub Heading No.2807.00 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, and that the Sulphuric Acid which is chargeable to duty was also cleared by the unit at Nil rate of duty to M/s Fertilisers Corporation of India for usage in the fertilisers, and that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ovisions of Section 37 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, amended the provisions of Rule 57CC of the Rules retrospectively, i.e. with effect from 01.08.1996. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent- Corporation would submit that the Tribunal has set aside the order dated 25.06.2003 only on the ground of non-availability of recovery machinery, and therefore, it is not open for the appell....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....raise all their contentions on factual and legal aspects, available to them under law. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 09.02.2005 passed by the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and disposal after affording an opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Having regard to the fact that this matter is of the year 2003 and the recovery....