9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 1124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances we are of the view that the findings of fact do not raise any substantial question of law. Such findings of fact are not demonstrated to be perverse. Reliance on the correspondence carried out by M/s. Narayan Dyeing cannot be of assistance to the appellant simply because if the appellant is distinct entity it could not have relied upon the correspondence between M/s. Narayan Dyeing a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant. The appellant has pointed out that it was carrying on business from Plot No. D-128, Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, T.T.C. Industrial Area, Navi Mumbai. They claim to be operating as an independent processors engaged in manufacture and processing of man made fabrics classifiable under Chapters 54, 55 and 60 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They claim registration in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut the orders-in-original and not the appellants. Consequently, the CESTAT has seriously erred in dismissing the appeal on the ground that it is hopelessly time barred and in any event the appellants were aware of the adjudication proceedings and the orders passed therein. 3. The narration in the memo of appeal itself shows that the appellants claim association with M/s. Narayan Dyeing. The app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not supported and rather belied by the record. It is this finding of fact which has been confirmed by the CESTAT. In confirming that finding of fact the CESTAT in paragraph 7 of the order under challenge has held that the adjudication order was served on the appellants on 11-9-2000. It was duly received by the authorized signatory of the appellants under his stamp. Similarly, the order dated 22-8- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se if the appellant is distinct entity it could not have relied upon the correspondence between M/s. Narayan Dyeing and the Department. The letterhead of M/s. Narayan Dyeing shows the same address as is noted by the CESTAT. Even the cause title of the present appeal shows the same address. In these circumstances we are of the view that the appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
