2010 (1) TMI 999

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... st the findings of the Commissioner in the impugned order that all the appellant firms are interlinked with each other and manufacturing common items with common brand name and therefore, they are not eligible for SSI Exemption and consequently demand for duty of Rs. 56,48,321/- comprising of different amounts from all the four firms have been confirmed and penalties under Rule 173(Q) have been im .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Assistant Commissioner for having been passed without jurisdiction. The matter stands referred to third member and is yet to be decided. He submits that in case the third member agrees with the Member Judicial, the impugned order becomes invalid since it would amount to have been passed without jurisdiction. Therefore, he submits that in view of the fact that there was a difference of opinion, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uld be required to make pre-deposit. 4. We have considered the submissions made by both sides. We are not going to the merits and other aspects on which detailed arguments were advanced by both the sides. The fact that difference of opinion as regards the order in original passed by Commissioner which is before the third Member is pointed out by the learned advocate. Shows that two views are pos .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X