9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (11) TMI 829X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r and that what they received is a copy of Order-in-Appeal of even number passed on 30-9-08 but issued on 19-11-08 - submitted that they did not know as to which of the order is the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the appeal filed by them against the Order-in-Original – Held that:- other order was issued on 19-11-2008 and the same was not received by the Commissioner of Customs, Coc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5/2008 passed on 30-9-2008 and issued on 6-10-2008 by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Cochin reducing the quanta of fine and penalty imposed on the respondent by the original authority. In a cross-objection filed by the respondent, it is submitted that they did not receive any copy of the above order and that what they received is a copy of Order-in-Appeal of even number passed on 30-9-08 b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to the Commissioner (Appeals) for de novo decision. 3. The learned Counsel for the respondent submits that there is no appeal of the Revenue yet against the Order-in-Appeal issued on 19-11-2008 and, therefore, it would not be open to the Tribunal to set aside that order in the present proceedings. 4. We have considered the submissions. We have found this case to be unprecedented inasmuch as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent, one going in favour of the respondent and the other against them. It is, thus, obvious that there was some confusion on the part of the lower appellate authority in the matter of disposing of the assessee s appeal filed against the Order-in-Original. We must say that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) should have dealt with the assessee s appeal with such application of mind as expected of an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
