2000 (8) TMI 435

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri B.K. Choubey, DR, for the Respondents. [Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. When these stay application was heard, it appeared that the point of law being settled, the main appeal itself could be taken up for disposal. Both sides agreeing, this was done after granting waiver of the pre-deposit of Rs. 15 lakhs imposed as penalty. 2. We have heard Shri V.S. Nankani, Advocate .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ers to the following judgments of the Tribunal in support of his statement that where the quantification of demand amount is to be done by the adjudicating authority, but where the job is delegated to a subordinate officer, the order becomes null and void : (i) Pure Drinks (New Delhi) Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi [2000 (117) E.L.T. 760 (T) = 1999 (34) RLT 471 (CEGAT)]. (ii) Indo Asian Marke .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X