Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (1) TMI 721 - CESTAT AHMEDABADScope of Tribunal's order - Difference of opinion - Majority order - whether the order of this Tribunal [2000 (11) TMI 553 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI] is to be treated as an order remanding the matter to appropriate adjudicating authority or the same has to be treated as the one allowing appeal in its totality without any further direction to the lower authorities for re-deciding the issue - Held that:- Tribunal had specifically stated that the Assistant Commissioner was not competent to adjudicate the matter since the demand of the duty is of ₹ 52 lakhs. The said order does not say whether they are setting aside the impugned order but it does say that the matter could be readjudicated by the competent adjudicating authority. It is also to be noted that the reasoning of the Tribunal was only to hold Assistant Commissioner as not competent to adjudicate the matter, hence the order which has been passed is presumed as non est order - sentence would indicate that the Tribunal, in fact, indicated that the matter should be heard by the competent authority. Again, the last sentence of the said paragraph also specifically says that the appeal is disposed of. It would indicate that the appeal was not allowed or was not rejected. It would also mean that the Tribunal in the Final Order No. 513/2000-C, dated 15-11-2000 had intended that the competent authority should take up the matter for disposal. I am fortified in my view by the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Wilson and Company (2000 (5) TMI 68 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI) - Decided against assessee.
|