9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 1045X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present proceedings only one OIO has been issued by the adjudicating authority against four show cause notices and the OIO has mentioned four numbers i.e. OIO No. 41 to 44. In view of the above observations in Sun Pharmaceuticals vs. CCE, Vapi [2013 (6) TMI-632-CESTAT-AHM], it is clear that more than one show cause notices decided under a single OIO filing of one appeal is sufficient. Accordingly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned advocate further brings to the notice of the bench Para-5 of the OIA dated 09.01.2013 , that four appeals were filed by the appellant against a common OIO No. 41 to 44/AC/DEM/Silvasa dated 13.12.2011 but the Commissioner (Appeals) has decided only one appeal and with observations that against each show cause notice issued the appellant should have filed a separate appeal. Learned advocate rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted vs. CCE, Vapi (supra), relied upon by the appellant has made the following observations:- "3. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that they have submitted single appeal against the same Order-in-Original, as the Order-in-Original has decided the four show cause notices by a single order and no four serial numbers were given by the adjudicating authority. In the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. After hearing both sides, we find that the? Order-in-Original was issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Division-II, Silvassa on 29-11-2011 and the order was despatched vide F. No. V(Ch.30)3-28/DEM/10-11/3943, dated 29-11-2011. We note that original authority had despatched only one Order-in-Original and not the four Orders-in-Original to the appellants. We, therefore, are of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
