9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 343X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period, on the ground that the final product on which duty demand was raised and confirmed by the adjudicating authority, was not tested to ascertain as to whether it contained synthetic staple fibre and on the ground that sales invoices described the goods as polyester waste and only cotton waste was cleared to the factory of the respondents and further used in the manufacture of cotton yarn. He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and of duty on cotton yarn containing Synthetic Staple fibre manufactured and cleared by the respondents from their factory during the relevant period, on the ground that the final product on which duty demand was raised and confirmed by the adjudicating authority, was not tested to ascertain as to whether it contained synthetic staple fibre and on the ground that sales invoices described the good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner (Appeals) has therefore, taken into account documents which were not produced before the lower authority, for the first time in the appeal. As per Rule 5 of the Central Excise (Appeals) Rules, an appellant shall not be entitled to produce before the Commissioner (Appeals) any evidence, whether oral or documentary, other than the evidence produced before him during the course of the proceedings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Rules. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) ought not to have decided the case on the basis of documents which were produced before him for the first time in appeal. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remand the case for fresh decision to the original authority who shall pass fresh orders after considering all the documents of the assessees and the documents in the form of invoices ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
