9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (7) TMI 769X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This is a Revenue appeal against Order-in-Original No. 104/92, dated 18-8-1992 by which the Commissioner applied the ratio of CCE s Order No. 37/85 and Order No. 44/87, dated 8-5-1987 wherein on de novo consideration the Commissioner had dropped the proceedings in Order No. 70/92, dated 31-3-1992 against the respondents on the ground that the Revenue has not been able to show that the three unit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stence. However, they pasted on the premises on which the said respondent was functioning earlier. 2. Heard ld. DR and the various grounds made out in the appeal and perused the order. 3. We notice from the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CCE, Hyderabad v. Electrolytic Foils Ltd. as reported in 1997 (91) E.L.T. 543 (SC) that the Revenue appeal is required to be dismissed for want of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to costs. In the present case also as per the mahazar and report filed, respondents are not in existence and they have closed down the unit. Our notices sent through the Registry also has come back undelivered with the same endorsement. In that view of the matter and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal is dismissed by applying the ratio of the Apex Court judgment noted above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
