9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (9) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent. [Order]. - Since the above applications arises out of a common order of the Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore dated 21-4-1986, they are taken up together and disposed of by a single order. The applications have been filed for dispensing with the prior deposit of duty of Rs. 36301.34 and penalty of Rs. 10,000/- in E(SB)/Stay/487/86 and penalty of Rs. 1000/- in E(SB)/Stay/488/86 imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore dated 21.4.86 imposing a duty of Rs. 36,3131.34 and penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on appellant in Appeal E(SB)/829/86 and penalty of Rs. 1,000/- on appellant in Appeal E(SB)/830/86. Shri Vijayaraghavan, the learned consultant for the appellants at the outset urged a preliminary question of law and contended that the show cause notice in pursuance of which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent) Act 79/85. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by the parties herein. Even-though the appeals relate to issues which a Special Bench alone would be competent to decide, since a preliminary question of law has been canvassed before us with reference to the very legality of the impugned order appealed against; without going into any question relating to either valuation o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re find that the very issuance of the show cause notice itself is without jurisdiction and is not legally valid and consequently the impugned order in consequence of the said show cause notice is also legally not tenable. In this view of the matter we set aside the impugned order appealed against and allow this appeal. We would however like to make it clear that this order of ours would not in any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
