9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 830X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bey, JDR, for the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. [Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. Order Nos. 3850-51/96-WRB dt. 2-12-1996 was the final order passed by the Tribunal remanding the matter for de novo adjudication. Duty of Rs. 92,24,724/- was confirmed in the lower proceedings. Before the original authority the quantification of the demand was questioned. That the quantifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n document. The prayer made in the application is that the earlier direction of providing this document be waived. 2. We are extremely surprised at this application. Apart from the fact that the applicant has described himself as an appellant, the request is entirely unreasonable. The subject document was the very genesis of the demand and the principles of natural justice required that it be fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... olutely no merits in this application and dismiss the same. 4. [Order per : G.N. Srinivasan, Member (J)]. - The above order dictated by my Ld. Brother has my concurrence. One thing should be borne in mind that the extension application has been received by the Registry on 12-6-2000 and the impugned order was made on 2-12-1996. By impugned order the Tribunal had set aside the order passed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such an application and the Tribunal will be forced to do it. The Jurisdiction of reviewing orders by the Tribunal has not been given by the Parliament when it enacted the appellate provisions of the Tribunal under the three Acts, namely the Central Excise Act, the Customs Act and the Gold (Control) Act (since repealed). When the Parliament has not given that power to the Tribunal any litigant bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
