9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (8) TMI 293X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order]. - The appellant in this case had despatched certain inputs received under Rule 57A to a job worker under Rule 57F(3)(3) for carrying out certain processes. These despatches had been made over a period of time, before and after 1-9-1996 on which date Notification No. 25/96 dated 31-8-1996 came into effect. This notification required that the inputs sent out to job worker under the afor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he present appeal has been filed. 2. On behalf of the appellant, Shri S.P. Arya, learned Advocate states that the notification in question cannot be applied to the subject despatches since these had been despatched before 1-9-1997 when the said notification came into effect as provided specifically therein. Before the coming into force of the notification it was not open to the department to pres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lector of Central Excise, Chandigarh in the case of Didar Steel Complex (Pvt.) Ltd. 1997 (96) E.L.T. 691. 3. It is stated in reply by Shri Y.R. Kilania, JDR that the Commissioner (Appeals) has considered all the aspects involved while passing the impugned order. He read out the relevant portion of the same and pleaded that the order may be upheld and appeal dismissed. 4. The rival submissions ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n granted under the notification to the Assistant Commissioner to deal with such cases of delay was available to him under the trade notice. Be that as it may, the contentions raised by the learned Counsel regarding the non-applicability of Rule 57-I in a case of this type as well as the lack of authority in respect of the Trade Notice vis-a-vis the relevant Rule itself are legally valid. In the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
