2004 (3) TMI 307

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ustice K.K. Usha, President]. - The assessee is the appellant. Complaint from the assessee is that the Commissioner while passing the impugned order had not followed the directions given by this Tribunal in Final Order No. 401-402/02-B, dated 27-8-2002 remanding the assessee's appeal for fresh consideration. 2. Going through the order of this Tribunal dated 27-8-2002, we find that the following....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....see at the site, keeping in view the Apex Court judgment in the case of CCE, Jaipur v. Man Structurals Ltd. [2001 (130) E.L.T. 401 (S.C.)]. The Commissioner while passing the impugned order has not taken into account the ratio of the law laid down in all the above referred cases. Therefore, the impugned order of the Commissioner is set aside and the matter is sent back to the Commissioner for fres....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ot attract excise duty. They placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Nagpur v. Wainganga Sahkari S. Karkhana Ltd. reported in [2002 (142) E.L.T. 12 (S.C.) = 2002 (50) RLT 125]. As mentioned earlier while remanding the matter this Tribunal directed the Commissioner to consider the assessee's case in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case ....