9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 158X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04, dated 9-1-2004. 2. Appearing on behalf of the appellants, ld. Counsel Shri Abdul Nazeer submits that they had filed a written submission to the Tribunal on 9-1-2004 which was dated 7-1-2004 but was received by the Registry by speed post on 9-1-2004 at 13.00 hours. Ld. Counsel submits that their written submission was not before the Bench when the case was decided and therefore, there is a mi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llants had appeared in spite of service of notice which had been acknowledged by them on 2-12-2003 and there was no request for adjournment of the case. He, further, submits that the appeal has been decided based on the evidence on record. The appeal has been decided on merits wherein it was proved beyond doubt that the capital goods in question had not suffered duty as the invoice No. 7, dated 3- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e impugned order and the impugned order was upheld by rejecting the appeal filed by the appellants. The facts of the case in the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of J.K. Synthetics Ltd. (supra) are distinguishable inasmuch as it was a case where there was sufficient cause for absence of the party and where the party was unable to appear for no fault of theirs. Whereas in the presen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
