9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 742X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l disagreed with each other. We would highly appreciate that instead of the appeal going to a third Member and for being heard in its entirety, it is now reheard by the Tribunal's West Zonal Bench afresh. They should, uninfluenced by the earlier findings in the matter, pass fresh order on merits and in accordance with law after hearing both sides. It is clarified that we express no opinion on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paid on the said inputs was also admissible according to the Petitioner. However, the Revenue issued a show cause notice proposing to deny such credit and that is how two orders were passed on this show cause notice on 2 January 2004 and 30 January 2006. 3. The Petitioners preferred an appeal and that appeal in terms of the applicable law lies to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find that the learned counsel for the Petitioners has rightly relied upon page 145 of the paper book. That indicates that there was a difference of opinion between MemberJudicial and MemberTechnical. Together they agreed to place the matter before the President of the Tribunal for the President to refer the question or point of disagreement to a third Member of the Tribunal. 6. However, the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. Upon perusal of the above with the assistance of both learned Advocates, we find that it is surprising that as a result of this way of recording the disagreement, the entire appeal may have to be heard by the third Member and that is hardly conducive to the larger interest of justice. The difference of opinion on facts noted should be referred specifically and a question or questions arising ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
