2018 (9) TMI 747

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Legal, for the Appellant. Mr. Swapnil Bangur, a/w Mr. J.B. Mishra, for the Respondent.   ORDER : 1. By the consent of both the parties, the Appeal itself is being disposed of at the stage of admission. 2. This Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short "the Act") challenges the order dated 30th March 2017 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se visit, the Revenue found that while the Appellant was working under the compounded levy scheme under Section 96ZH of the Rules and paying duty per machine/per shift on the length of machine under the Notification No. 211/82 CE dated 31st August 1982 and also additional duty at the rate of 15 percent of the basic duty of excise. It was found that although four machines were installed, it had deb....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Notice dated 25th April 1994. 7. Being aggrieved, the Appellant filed an Appeal to the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). By the order dated 14th October 2008, the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) allowed the Respondent-Assessee's Appeal inter alia holding that the entire proceedings before the Joint Commissioner was without jurisdiction as it was contrary to the proviso 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 Rules. It is only thereafter that the Adjudicating Authority was to dispose of the Show Cause Notice by passing a fresh order. 9. We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal has not dealt with the findings rendered by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) that the order dated 30th May 2008 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise is without jurisdiction. This, as it is ....