9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 364X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1-1998 to the above order dated 9-10-1998, stating that the sanctioned amount of Rs. 91,434.95 was being adjusted against the Central Excise duty due from M/s. Rathi Alloys and Steel Ltd. in terms of Order-in-Original No. 94/97 dated 8-1-1998. As per the corrigendum; the Assistant Commissioner's order took a final shape as follows : "Consequent upon the final order 448/98-CE dated 9-6-1998 of the CEGAT." I hereby sanction the refund of Rs. 91,434.95 to M/s. Rathi India Ltd., MIA, Alwar. However, since an amount of Rs. 363344.43 is pending realisation against M/s. Rathi Alloys & Steel Ltd., MIA, Alwar in terms of order-in-original No. 94/97 dated 8-1-1998 passed vide C. No. V (72)11/Dem/95. The amount of the refund i.e. Rs. 91,434.95 is adj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and has submitted that the lower appellate authority has passed the impugned order without going into the merits of the case and by treating the appeal as an appeal against the earlier orders of the Assistant Commissioner and not as one against the Assistant Commissioner's order impugned in that appeal. He has further submitted that, in the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), the appellants had not only challenged the Assistant Commissioner's order dated 7-6-1999 but also had challenged his earlier orders. The lower appellate authority, however, did not entertain the challenge against the Assistant Commissioner's earlier orders. To this extent, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot be sustained in law, according to l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for condonation of the delay involved in the filing of the appeal against the Assistant Commissioner's order dated 9-10-1998 as modified by the corrigendum. Had an opportunity been given by the lower appellate authority to the appellants to seek such condonation of delay for the ends of justice, the present appeal would not, perhaps, have arisen before the Tribunal. 8. In view of the foregoing observations and findings, I think it would serve the ends of justice, if this Tribunal permits the matter to be litigated before the lower appellate authority on its merits. Accordingly, I set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and allow this appeal by way of remand, directing ld. Commissioner (Appeals) to entertain the appeal as on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
