9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (1) TMI 583X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Uday Kumar, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duty and penalty, we take the appeal itself inasmuch as the disputed issue of classification stands decided in the appellant-company s own case by the Supreme Court. 2. The basic dispute is as regards the classifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt as reported in 2000 (116) E.L.T. A69. 2.1. The Commissioner in his impugned Order takes note of all the above Orders passed by the Tribunal as also the judgment passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court, but surprisingly, does not follow the same. It has been observed by the appellate authority - ....On going through the order I find that the allegations on which the Show Cause-cum-Demand Notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ereagainst by the Revenue was dismissed. As such, it was not open to the appellate authority to decide the same issue of classification afresh on the ground that the Tribunal has not taken note of certain allegations. The above view of the appellate authority reflects upon the lack of his understanding of legal provisions and judicial hierarchy. Once the disputed issue stands decided, it is not op ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
