2018 (1) TMI 617

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant Shri Hrishikesh, Advocate & Shri Atul Gupta, Advocate, for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary The issue in this appeal by Revenue is, whether the learned Commissioner (Appeals) have been correctly allowed the appeal of the respondent by way of remand, as Section 35A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was amended with effect from 11/05/2001 and taking notice of the said amendment under the n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sus Commissioner (supra) and it was held that observations of the Apex Court in the case of MIL India Ltd. Versus Commissioner (supra) are in the nature of passing remarks on the scope of powers of Commissioner (Appeals), in appeal under Section 35A(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore, the observations of Supreme Court, in view of the Tribunal, cannot take precedence over the finding of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the ground of failure of Justice. This would create an anomaly and cause prejudice to the Revenue as it would bring an end to the litigation without adjudicating on the demand raised by the Show Cause Notice. Therefore, only just and proper order, in such a case, would be to the order of remand, to adjudicate the matter de-novo after giving due hearing to the respondent-assessee. Accordingly, in ....