2003 (5) TMI 274

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ber (J)]. Revenue filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. In this case, respondents made an import of certain tubes and claimed benefit of Notification No. 177/88. The condition of the notification is that the imported tubes are to be utilised within one year or such extended period, as the case may be. If the importer fails to utilise the tub .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ommissioner, the impugned order again granting the extension is not sustainable. 6. The contention of the respondents is that earlier extensions were denied without affording an opportunity of hearing to the respondents, therefore, the orders were passed in violation to the principles of natural justice and if the orders were passed in violation to the principles of natural justice, the orders c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... As we are not agreeing with the respondents that the orders denying extension were passed in violation to the principles of natural justice, the ratio of the decision relied upon by the respondents is not applicable to the facts of the present case. 8. Further, we find that the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and Ors. v. Gurdev Singh and Shri Ashok Kumar reported in AIR 199 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X