9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 509X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . [Order per : Justice K.K. Usha, President]. In this appeal at the instance of the assessee challenge is against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), dt. 28-5-2003 setting aside the order of the Asstt. Commissioner passed pursuant to direction issued by this Tribunal in its order reported as Gabriel India Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh - 2000 (120) E.L.T. 770. In the above order Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the amount of deduction due on account of interest on receivables. 2. The above would show that what was left to the Asstt. Commissioner was only the quantification of the amount which has to be granted as deduction on account of receivable goods. By order dt. 26-9-2000, the Asstt. Commissioner examined the issue and held as follows : The interest on receivable goods has been worked out to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y this Tribunal in the order of remand. There is no case for the Revenue before us that the calculation is wrong. Commissioner (Appeals) had no authority to go into the issue whether the assessee was entitled to deduction of the interest on receivable since the issue has been decided by this Tribunal in the order of remand and it is accepted by the Revenue. We, therefore, set aside the order impug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
