9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... :- 17-2-2011 - Ms. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, JJ. Shri V.Lakshmikumaran, Sr. Counsel Shri Panchanathan, Advocate, Shri T.H.Rao, SDR Per Jyoti Balasundaram The assessees herein are engaged in the manufacture of asbestos cement products falling under Chapter Heading 68.04 of the First Schedule to the CETA 85. They were paying duty on the above products which were manufactured using cement and asbestos fibre as main raw materials. They commenced manufacture of upgraded technology products wherein 25% or more of fly ash was used w.e.f. 20.1.92 and they also continued to manufacture the products without fly ash until 17.10.92, when they stopped manufacture of products made traditionally, namely without ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the ground of absence of authority on the part of the Central Excise department to issue the SCNs challenged in the writ petitions. Special Leave Petition filed by the Union of India before the Hon ble Supreme Court was withdrawn vide order dt. 26.11.2001 holding as under :- The applications filed for withdrawal of appeals are allowed with liberty to the appellants to take such steps as may be available to them in accordance with law. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. The above order was reported as 2002 (141) ELT A285 (SC). 2. Fresh personal hearing was fixed by the apex court after the Supreme Court s order supra and the assessees appeared and made submissions and also filed written submissions. The impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of India takes steps and provides for the required machinery under Section 11D, it shall be open to the Union of India to work out or quantify and determine the liability in the manner as prescribed or provided for in any liability thereof and recover the same in accordance with law. The validity of Section 11D has been upheld by the Hon ble High Court but the petitions of the assessees have been allowed only on the ground of lack of authority in the respondent to issue notices challenged in the writ petitions before the High Court, at the same time preserving the liability created under Section 11D. 5. In the light of the above, we set aside the impugned order on the ground that SCNs adjudicated therein have already been quashed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
