2002 (3) TMI 523

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shroff, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A. Chopra, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. The appeals are taken up for disposal with consent after waiving deposit. 2. In the order impugned in this appeal, the Commissioner has confirmed the demand for duty of around Rs. 8.36 crores and imposed penalty of equal amount on Premier Synthetics and Rs. 80 lakhs .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d the Commissioner to adjourn the hearing, which was fixed on 27-3-2001 pointing out that these three documents had been received only the previous day and would have to be studied. The Commissioner in her order has declined to grant this adjournment and adjudicated the matter. 4. We are of the view that in the facts of this case, the Commissioner s order has not been passed in accordance with t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed on the remaining appellant would depend upon the results of adjudication with regard to the manufacturer. 5. The appeals are accordingly allowed and the impugned order set aside. Counsel for the assessee undertakes to file reply to the notice within a month from the receipt of this order. Mr. Mayur Shroff, Advocate for Surat Ahmedabad Transport also says that he will file submission within th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X