9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (3) TMI 577X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jadhav, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duties and penalties, we proceed to decide the appeal itself. 2. As per facts on record the appellant is Independent Textile Processors Based upon their declaration, Commissioner of Central Excise vide his order No. 1/98, dated 27-12-1998 fixed annual capaci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same by relying upon the Hon ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Sangam Processors Bhilwara Ltd. [2002 (146) E.L.T. 254 (S.C.)] laying down that length of the gallery is not to be considered while arriving at the number of chambers. 3. Being aggrieved with the said order, Revenue filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) on the main ground that it was not open to the Additional Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing both the sides we find that the main grievance of the appellant is that the Final Order No. 32/99, dated 14-7-99 passed by the Commissioner was not an adjudication order passed in appealable form. The same was merely in the form of a letter intimating the appellant about the final fixation of annual capacity of production. As such, they could not have filed any appeal there against. Instead th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etermining the annual capacity of production. Even when the appellant subsequently filed a representation there against, they were neither advised by the office of the Commissioner to file an appeal against the said order nor the said representation was decided by them. We are informed that the same is pending till date. As such, we are of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
