2012 (9) TMI 2

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt Shukla, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, President]. - Heard DR for the appellants and learned advocate for the respondent. These appeals arise from common order dated 11th May 2005 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Noida. By the impugned order the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal filed by the respondent to the extent the department had denied .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he product in question. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) while granting the said benefit to the respondent has arrived at a clear finding that the goods in question are sold directly to the industrial consumer as well as sold through a network of the dealers and products are packed in unit size with detail description of the product and with specific mention on the packing that the packed mater .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o fault can be found with the findings arrived at by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding entitlement of benefit to the respondent in relation to the provision of law comprised under Rule 34 of the said rules. 5. As no other ground of challenge is canvassed in the matter, we do not find any case for interference in the impugned order. Hence, the appeals are fail and are hereby dismissed.
.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X