TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 701
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shah, with Mr. Prasad Paranjape i/b PDS Legal for the Respondent JUDGMENT ( Per Riyaz I. Chagla J.) 1. The Appellant has filed the present Appeal challenging the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, East Zone Bench at Mumbai ("CESTAT") dated 5th August 2014 by which Judicial Member of CESTAT has held that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to entertain the Appeal against....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Appeals) on the ground that neither the deficiency memo nor any personal hearing was given to the Respondent to defend its case and that the rate of drawback applied for was proper and correct. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide order in Appeal dated 29th April 2014 rejected the Appeals filed by the Respondent. The Respondent being aggrieved by the order had filed an Appeal before CESTAT. CESTAT by a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....law CESTAT, Mumbai is correct in making an observation that there is no bar on entertaining appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), despite the clause (b) to sub-section (1) of Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944? c) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CESTAT, Mumbai is correct in remanding the case back to the adjudicating authority, by givi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to: "a rebate of duty of excise of goods exported to any country or territory outside India or on excisable materials used in the manufacture of goods which are exported to any country or territory outside the India". 4. Mr. Mangalambhar has, therefore, contended that the impugned order is without jurisdiction as CESTAT has considered an Appeal from the order of the Commissioner, wherein the i....