9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 303X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n for consideration - the grievance of delay in disposing of the appeals by the Tribunal has no merits and is not accepted. Appeal dismissed. - CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 64 OF 2018 - - - Dated:- 1-11-2018 - M.S. SANKLECHA RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, J.J. Mr. Prakash Shah a/w Mr. Jas Sanghavi I/b PDS Legal for the appellants Mr. Karan Adik I/b Mr. Ram Ochani for the respondent P.C. 1. This appeal under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act) challenges the common order dated 25th October, 2017 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). 2. The Common impugned order disposed of 33 appeals by the different assessees and one appeal by the Revenue. Besides it also disposed of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he some of the other noticees to one Gupta Carpet Udyog Ltd. (GCUL). The appellant (along with other parties similarly placed) were held liable to payment of duty as benefit of exemption was not available under Notification No.1/95 dated 4th January, 1995 thus demanding duty from the appellant and imposing penalty upon GCUL by order dated 18th December, 2006. The Revenue had also filed an appeal from the common impugned order dated 18th December, 2006 in respect of M/s. GCUL and M/s. Shri. Sanand Textile Industries Ltd. and Karan Fibres and Fabrics Ltd. 5. The appeals filed by two of the assessees viz. M/s. Shree Sanand Textile Industries Ltd. and M/s. Karan Fibres and Fabrics Ltd. to the Tribunal were part of the common order dated 18th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r 11 years before the Tribunal, it was not justified in remanding the proceedings to the Adjudicating Authority. This grievance has no merit as the delay was only on account of the appellant's appeal awaiting its turn before the Tribunal. It is true that a similar appeal filed by the M/s. Shri. Sanand Textile Industries Ltd. (supra) and M/s. Karan Fibres and Fabrics Ltd.(supra) were disposed of in 2009 by the Tribunal. However, unless the parties invite the attention of the Tribunal that the issue is covered, no occasion would arise for the Tribunal to have any knowledge of the same. In this case, no application was filed by the Appellant for early hearing by pointing out that the issue is covered by its earlier order. This delay wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
