2018 (8) TMI 1004

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....EMBER And MR. P. ANJANI KUMAR, TECHNICAL MEMBER Mr. N. Anand, Advocate For the Appellant Mr. Pakshirajan, Assistant Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG These nine appeals have been filed by the appellant against the common impugned order dated 28.11.2008 passed by the Commissioner whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeals of the appellants. Sin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....;s factory clandestinely and with an intention to misuse the benefit of Notification applicable to SSI units. The said show-cause notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore vide Order-in-Original No. 8/2006 dated 05.05.2006 clubbing the clearances made by M/s. Max Rubber Company with that of the appellant i.e. M/s. Oxford Rubber Pvt. Ltd. Thereafter the Department issu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Final Order Nos. 561 - 563/2010 dated 03.02.2010 set aside the said order and remanded the case back to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the issue afresh after following the principles of natural justice. The learned counsel further submitted that after the remand, the issue was decided by the adjudicating authority and the same was challenged before the Tribunal in the second round of li....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../s. Max Rubber Company has no independent existence. Further we find that the said Order-in-Original No. 8/2006 dated 05.05.2006 on the basis of which the present cases were decided has already been set aside by the Tribunal vide its Final Order Nos. 561 - 563/2010 dated 03.02.2010 and remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority. Further we find that in the second round of litigation be....