TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the question whether the Tribunal could re-call its order dated 6-4-1999 passed on merits. 2.The respondents claimed exemption from excise duty on bottom work platform for weigh bridge on the ground that the same were necessary equipment for manufacturing operations and, thus, exemption under Notification No. 123/81-C.E., dated 2-6-1981 was applicable. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontrol) Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982 and judgment of the Apex Court in J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise - 1996 (86) E.L.T. 472 (S.C.) held that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to re-call the ex parte order. 4.We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. 5.In view of the fact that the Tribunal was satisfied that non-appearance on behalf of the respondents at the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce has in this respect, CEGAT is clothed with express power under Rule 41 to make such order as is necessary to secure the ends of justice. CEGAT has, therefore, the power to set aside an order passed ex parte against the respondent before it if it is round that the respondent had, for sufficient cause, been unable to appear". no question of law arises. Thus, there is no ground to interfere with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|