2008 (8) TMI 771

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Wadhwa, J. Shri Sameer Chitkara, SDR, for the Appellant. Ms. Shilpa Dave, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Arguing on the ROM application, the learned SDR Shri Sameer Chitkara submits that Revenue s appeal stand rejected, by the Tribunal vide Order No. A/2929/WZB/AHD/2007, dt. 3-12-07, by upholding the findings of Commissioner (Appeals) that the benefit of Section 4(4)(d)(ii) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he time of hearing of the appeal, cannot be hold to be a mistake. By referring to the date of the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in case of M/s. Amrit Agro Industries Ltd., learned advocate submits that the said judgment was available when the Tribunal passed an order in the present case and attention of the Bench was never brought to such decision by learned SDR representing Revenue. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... se of M/s. Dugar Tetenal India Ltd., Hon ble Supreme Court has observed in Para 13 of their judgment that the view taken in case of Srichakra Tyres Ltd. was affirmed by them in case of CCE, Delhi v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. [2002 (141) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) = 2002 (3) SCC 547] and has further observed in Para 14 that the Tribunal has rightly remanded the case to re-determine the duty payable, keeping in mind t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X