9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1364X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld that:- The present appeal requires to be remanded to the adjudicating authority for De novo consideration basing upon the outcome of the decision of the Apex Court in the appellant’s own case for the earlier period which is sub-judice - appeal is allowed by way of remand to the original authority. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e allegations a show-cause notice was issued to the appellant and after following the due process, the original authority confirmed the demand and aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who also rejected the appeal of the appellant. 2. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has already held that the body building of motor vehicles are covered by Tariff Heading 87.02 and not Tariff Heading 87.07. He further submitted that the decision of Satguru Auto Builders was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal and the Tribunal has wrongly classified the said item under Heading 87.07 of Central Excise Tariff. He further submitted that on this identical issue in the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter is sub-judice. 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties and the perusal of the record and the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Satguru Auto Builders as well as the Stay Order granted to the appellant by the Apex Court, we are of the view that the present appeal requires to be remanded to the adjudicating authority for De novo consideration basing upon the outcome of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
