9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (7) TMI 791X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. - This appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the impugned order dated 21-3-2000 by which he has disallowed the abatement claim for the period 24-12-1997 to 31-12-1997 and 31-12-1997 to 8-1-1998. 2. The facts giving rise to the appeal are that the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of non-alloy steel ingots/billets. They filed clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary, 1998 and 15th and 16th Feb. 1998. 4. The learned Counsel for the appellants has contended that the abatement has been disallowed for the period in question without assigning sufficient reasons and that the order is contradictory, as after having opined that the abatement was allowable to the appellants, the Commissioner could not later on record the findings that the same was inadmissib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1335) to 31-12-1997(1600) and 1-1-1998(1600) to 8-1-1998(1200) for a continuous period of not less than seven days, abatement claims in respect of these periods are inadmissible. It is further seen that the party filed re-commencement in respect of their claims on 1-1-1998 and 9-1-1998 instead of 31-12-1997 and 8-1-1998 which is again a violation of the provisions of Rule 96ZO(2)(c) of the Rules" ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... But these letters had not been referred in detail and no sufficient reason has also been recorded by the Commissioner for holding the abatement claim was inadmissible for the disputed period. 8. Therefore, in our view, the abatement claim of the appellants deserves to be re-examined for the period in dispute referred to above, by the learned Commissioner afresh in the light of the letters, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
