9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 608X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Respondent. [Order]. - Heard Shri S.K. Mohanty, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Gautam Mukherjee, learned counsel for the revenue. 2. By means of this appeal under Section 35G(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the appellant has prayed for quashing the orders dated 17-3-2009 and 24-7-2009 passed by the Tribunal and the order dated 18-8-2009 passed by the Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Central Excise Act, 1944. On deposit of this amount, the requirement of pre-deposit of balance amount of duty and penalty imposed on the appellant shall be dispensed with and the appeal will be decided on merit. Considering the date of appeal it is taken up for early hearing and posted for final disposal on 11-9-2008 at 11.30 hrs subject to compliance of the stay order as above." As the petitione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner sought review of the aforesaid order in MAs.-(ROM)-200-202/09 which was rejected by the Tribunal as the Tribunal has no power of review. On remand the appeals were taken up by the Commissioner (Appeals) on 18-8-2009. The Commissioner observed that the directions given by the Tribunal to deposit Rs. 4,00,000.00 as pre-de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mind in taking a decision which cannot be possible without giving reason. 6. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the application for waiver could not have been rejected without assigning any reason by a non-speaking order which shows non-application of mind. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the matter is liable to be remanded to the Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
