2009 (11) TMI 796

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e same appellant involve common issues and accordingly, are dealt with by a common order. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the appellants are manufacturers of parts and accessories of motor vehicles as well as cranes and the appellants received bright bars falling under sub-heading No. 7215.10 from manufacturers of such bright bars and have taken credit of duty .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sue can be agitated, the same should have been agitated at the ends of manufacturers of the said bright bars. The appellants have not used the bright bars to draw any wires. The show cause notices issued do not make such allegations. Therefore interfering with the order of the Original Authority dropping the proceedings on the show cause notices is not justified. 5. Ld. SDR reiterates the findi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... im may not be strictly valid. The Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order of the Original Authority. Such setting aside the order of the Original Authority, which was in favour of the assessees, in the normal course can only revive the show cause notices. As pleaded by the ld. Advocate, if there was any wrong payment of duty on the part of the manufacturers of bright bars, the Department sh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X