9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... already adjudicated by the Adjudicating Authority. In respect of show cause notices at Sl. Nos. 1 to 5, the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeals filed by the appellant and demand was set aside and matter was not taken up further by the Revenue. In respect of show cause notices 8 and 9, the matter went up to Hon ble Supreme Court, whereby the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), setting aside the demand, as upheld by the Tribunal, was upheld. In respect of show cause notices at serial Nos. 19 and 20, the contention is that in respect of issue of classification, the matter went up to the Hon ble Supreme Court and Hon ble Supreme Court upheld the order passed by the Tribunal whereby the demands were set aside. The appellant filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d below :- S. No. Show cause notice No. Date Issued Period Amount Cess 1. 154-GZB-11/96 Dated 9-10-96 Diff. duty on the alleged claim of clearance of side sitting/cutting as H.R. Coils April 96 to June 96 1,823,415 - 2. 186-GZB-11/96 Dated 26-12-90 -do- July 96 to Oct 96 1,490,559 - 3. 23-GZB-II/97 Dated 01.04.97 -do- Nov. 96 96,172 - 4. 40-GZB-II/97 Dated 25-6-97 -do- Dec. 96 to Jan. 97 228,887 - 5. C.No.20-DEMDN/BSSL/SBD/VI/97/1099 Dated 11-8-97 -do- Feb. 97 to May 97 1, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 08/ADC/GZB/2004 Dated 30-12-04 -do- Jan. 96 to Mar. 96 1,810,665 - 20. 09/ADC/GZB-2004 Dated 30-12-04 -do- July 95 to Dec. 95 2,038,004 - 21. 06/COMM/DI V-III/05 Dated 4-5-05 -do- April 04 to Mar. 05 Cess 4,144,138 383 15 22. 03/COMM/GZB/ 06 Dated 8-5-06 -do- April 05 to Jan. 06 7,975,755 159 517 TOTAL 64,201,067 217 832 4. We find that in respect of the show cause notices mentioned at serial Nos. 1 to 5, the same were already adjudicated and the demands are already set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order-in-Appeal No. 319/98, dated 19-5-9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find that these demands are not sustainable. 6. In respect of remaining demands raised on the ground that earlier adjudication order No. 164/96, dated 16-7-96 has been passed, we find that the adjudication order No. 164/96, dated 16-7-96 upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) but subsequently the Tribunal set aside the same. 7. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) held as under :- The present appeal has been filed by M/s. Bhushan Steel Strips Ltd., against the Order-in-Original No. 164/96, dated 16-7-96 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise. Appellants were given two chances of personal hearing on 10-12-96 and again on 29-4-97 but they did not avail the opportunity. Hence the appeal is being taken up on merit. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
