9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (10) TMI 327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order-in-appeal No. 1894-CE/CHD/91, dated 11-10-1991. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Tie bars falling under sub-heading No. 7302.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They were charged for contravention of Rule 9(1) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 for having cleared 265.927 MT of M.S. Tie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S. Flats, the Collector (Appeals) remanded the matter to the Assistant Collector for possible modification of the demand for duty by allowing Modvat credit on the basis of duty paying documents produced by the party in respect of inputs in question. This order-in-appeal dated 28-2-1990 was not contested further by the assessee and accordingly further proceedings held culminated in the order-in-ori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not open to him to reagitate the matter either before the Assistant Collector or the appellate authority. The order had been remanded to the Assistant Commissioner and an opportunity to produce the duty paying documents like GP 1s were afforded to them but they had failed to produce the same before the adjudicating authority. As such the demand was rightly confirmed in remand proceedings. Moreover ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts' and not bars. As such the Assistant Collector was right in confirming the demand and the appellate authority erred in setting aside his orders. 4. When the case was called none appeared on behalf of the respondents. In this case, several opportunities were granted to the appellant to produce the order-in-appeal No. 184-85/CE/CHD/90, dated 28-2-1990 passed by the Commissioner of Central E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
