2008 (7) TMI 176

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t is not the case of the appellant that packaged tea was a different excisable commodity after 1-3-1999 - It is a clear finding in the order of the appellate Commissioner that, from 1-3-1999, packaged tea was not a separate excisable commodity - This finding has not been challenged in the present appeal – hence revenue appeal is liable to be dismissed
S/Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (J) and P. Karth .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s not the case of the appellant that packaged tea was a different excisable commodity after 1-3-1999. It is a clear finding in the order of the appellate Commissioner that, from 1-3-1999, packaged tea was not a separate excisable commodity. This finding has not been challenged in the present appeal. 2. In the above circumstances, after hearing both sides and considering their submissions, we dism .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X