2005 (2) TMI 239

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ir appeal by Order-in-Appeal No. 49-CE/Appl/Knp/2004, dated 13-2-2004. That Order-in-Appeal was passed against the corrigendum dated 26-10-2001 to the Order-in-Original No. 200-DCK-II/Seiz/2000, dated 30-10-2000 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, C.Ex., Division II, Kanpur. The Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the appeal of the assessee with the following observations : A personal hearing in t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Appellants against Order-in-original No. 2000/DCK-II/Seiz/2000 has already been disposed off separately. In the Appeal under reference I find that the ld. Adjudicating Authority has loaded additional liability of duty on the Appellants by way of issue of impugned corrigendum to Order issued after a period of nearly two years. I also find that substantive changes have been brought out by the corri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... P/2002 filed by the Appellants with consequential relief. 2. The contention of the learned Counsel for the respondent is that the corrigendum was entirely contrary to legal provisions and also the instructions of Central Board of Excise and Customs and there was no error or illegality in the Order-in-Appeal of the Commissioner (Appeals) in allowing the appeal. 3. There is no merit in the Reven .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X