2006 (1) TMI 333

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order]. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal dated 27-2-2004 wherein the appellate authority has allowed the appeal of the respondents. 2. None appeared for the respondents despite notice. Heard Learned D.R. and considered the submissions made by him. I find that the issue involved in this case is regarding imposition of penalty on the respondents under Rule 96ZP(3) of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in respect of Beauty Dyers [2004 (163) E.L.T. 128 (Mad.)], I find that the appellate authority has not considered the facts in this case are different then the facts in the Beauty Dyers case. The issue involved in the Beauty Diers are in respect of compounded levy scheme on the textile processor and not re-rolling mills. 3. To my mind the issue involved in this case is totally different then the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X