9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (3) TMI 570X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .A. Mehta, J. (Oral)]. - Appellant revenue has proposed following three questions stated to be substantial questions of law arising out of order dated 7-11-2008 made by Customs, Excise & Service tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) : (i) Whether the CESTAT has correctly passed the order allowing SSI benefit under Notification No. 8/2003-C.E., dated 1-3-2003 by ignoring condition laid down at Para-2( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id down in Paragraph No. 2(vi) of Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. Similarly, in relation to the various orders of different Benches of Tribunal referred to in Paragraph Nos. 2 and 3 of the impugned order of Tribunal, it was submitted that different notifications were applicable in those cases decided by other Benches of Tribunal and hence, the impugned order of Tribunal is required to be interfered w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore, it is not possible to state that any paragraph of the said notification has been ignored as contended by the appellant. 5. Similarly, in so far as the so-called distinction between the cases relied upon by the Tribunal and the respective notifications, suffice it to state that neither does the impugned order of the Tribunal indicate which were the notifications in the decided cases re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would be rendered nugatory in a case where an order of adjudicating authority is given precedence over the order made by the appellate authority. In the case of the Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs, Vadodara-II v. M/s. Welspun Gujarat Stahl Rohren Ltd.. Tax Appeal No. 695 of 2009 decided on 3-3-2010 the legal position has been enunciated. 7. The submissions made on behalf of the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
