9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 413X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner (Appeals) has no power of remand after 11.5.2001, and therefore the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot be allowed to survive. The grounds on which the Commissioner (Appeals) wanted the matter to be considered by the original authority afresh are valid - set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the order of the original authority insofar as the same related to de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions on the factual position in support of claim of credit. The Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the matter with the following the findings and observations: 6 I have carefully gone through the facts of the case and the submissions on record. It is quite evident from the findings contained in the Order impugned that the lower authority has recorded his findings without seeking any reply from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A with effect from 11.5.2001 deleting the power of remand as settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mil India Ltd. vs. CCE, Noida reported in 2007 (210) ELT 188 (SC). 4. Learned Advocate for the respondents concedes that there was delay in submitting reply before the original authority and seeks another opportunity for establishing their claim of eligibility of cenvat credit. 5. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be considered by the original authority afresh are valid. In view of the above, I set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the order of the original authority insofar as the same related to denial of cenvat credit to the respondents and remand the matter to the original authority for fresh consideration. 7. It is directed that the respondents shall file reply within 45 days from tod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
