2004 (12) TMI 439

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri V.M. Doiphode, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Vimlesh Kumar, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Sekhon, Member (T)]. The issue involved in this case is the classification of the product Surgical Mobile Image Intensifier T.V. System , manufactured by the assessee. During the course of the hearing before us, it was demonstrated that the Commissioner in his finding has all .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... art of the Commissioner is not what a quasi judicial authority has to perform and therefore cannot be upheld. The quasi judicial authority should determine and finally conclude the issues which are raised and are required to be determined by him in the proceedings. The authority cannot delegate that power to any other officer. The Revenue s appeal also therefore required to be allowed. 3. Since .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X