9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 772/2010-SM - 20039-20040/2018 - Dated:- 8-1-2018 - Shri SS Garg, Judicial Member Shri V.M. Doiphode, Advocate - For the Appellant Dr. J. Harish, Dy. Commissioner(AR) - For the Respondent ORDER Per: SS GARG These two appeals have been filed by appellant against the impugned order both dt. 08/07/2010 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) whereby the Commissioner(Appeals) has dismissed the appeals of the appellant and upheld the Orders-in-Original. Since the issue involved in both the appeals is identical, hey are disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, the facts of appeal No.E/1772/2010 are taken. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are manufacturers of steel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide Final Order No.1620 to 1627/2006 dt 03/10/2006 allowed the appeals filed by various parties including the appeal of appellant by holding that the demands are not sustainable. After the decision of the Tribunal, in respect of other two show-cause notices, the original authority confirmed the demand and aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals) who rejected the appeals and upheld the Order-in-Original dt. 030/11/2009. Hence the present appeals. 3. Heard both the parties and perused records. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned orders are not sustainable in law a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned orders. 7. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of material on record and the various decisions relied upon by the appellant, I find that the Division Bench of this Tribunal in the appellant's own case while disposing of a bunch of petitions has allowed the assessee's appeal and set aside the demands. It is an admitted fact that the Revenue has not filed any appeal against decision of the Tribunal dt. 03/10/2006 which became final as far as appellants are concerned. Further I find that both the authorities in their order has not considered the decision of the Tribunal in the appellant's own case and have confirmed the demand r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
