2017 (3) TMI 294

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Kumar Singh, Superintendent (A.P), for Respondent Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar: The present appeal is filed by Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. 285/CE/Appl/Noida/2010 dated 31/08/2010 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Noida. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents were engaged in the manufacture of the Connector Harness & Parts of Connector falli....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... reported at 2006 (201) E.L.T. 559 (Karnataka) and ruling of Hon'ble Supreme Court through which SLP filed against said judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka was dismissed by the Apex Court as reported at 2008 (223) E.L.T. A170 (S.C.) set aside the said Order-in-Original No. R-23/AC/Div.-I/2010-11 dated 27/04/2010 and directed the Original Authority to allow claim for refund. Aggriev....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....these case laws are different from the fact of the present case. 4. Heard the Id D. R. has supported the grounds of appeal. 5. Heard the ld. Counsel for the respondent who has contended that it is an admitted fact in the Show Cause Notice that respondent factory is closed. He has further submitted that ruling of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt.....