9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (11) TMI 200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Member (J)]. This appeal arises from Order-in-Appeal No. 313/90, dated 28-2-1990 rejecting the appeal on the ground that application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal is liable to be rejected. It was urged that the appeal could not be filed within the time limit as the appellant was seeking clarification from the department with regard to another item pending in the refund claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been fully adjudicated, therefore, the order-in-original is not a speaking order and hence he stated that the matter should be remanded to the original authority. In support of his contention for condonation of delay he relies on the judgment rendered in the case of Collector of Customs v. Hindustan Motors reported in 1998 (103) E.L.T. 209 where delay of 69 days was condoned. Learned SDR reiterate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... items imported by them. While in the order portion, he has dealt with `seal kit only and there is no reason given while rejecting their claim that the seal kit was not correctly classifiable under Heading 9806.00. As the Asst. Commissioner, has not given reason for rejecting the same, therefore, we deem it proper to remand the case to the Asst. Commissioner to adjudicated the matter after render ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
