9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 194X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t against the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal'), dated 24-2-2005 raising eight substantial questions of law. As is evident from order dated 11-7-2006 the appeal was confined to proposed question Nos. (iii) and (v), which are extracted below : "(iii) Whether, the impugned letter dated 30-6-2000 issued by the Ld. Deputy Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 962 (for short 'the Act'). According to him, in this communication neither any reason has been recorded nor any plea raised by the appellant has been dealt with, hence, the same cannot be termed as a reasoned order. He has further contended that even the show cause notice should be treated beyond a period of six months, as no notice under Section 28 of the Act could be issued to the appellant afte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and which was required to be paid, determined after hearing the assessee therein, was held to be an order. A perusal of order dated 30-6-2000, which according to the appellant was not an order, shows that the same itself provided towards the end of the order that an appeal from this order lies to the Appellate Commissioner of Customs. The relevant part thereof is extracted below :- "An appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt was given due opportunity in the form of show cause notice to which the appellant had filed reply also. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in this contention of the appellant. 6. As far as second issue is concerned, as per the provisions of Section 128 of the Act, the appeal could be filed against the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Customs) to the Appellate Commissioner of Customs withi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
