TMI Blog2003 (7) TMI 610X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In this appeal, the Revenue has questioned the validity of the impugned order-in-appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has reversed the order-in-original of the adjudicating authority and set aside the duty and penalty against the respondents. 2. The learned SDR has contended that the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is illegal as the respondents had cleared the dutiable go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... covered under Heading 8479, but under 8445. The adjudicating authority accordingly confirmed the duty demand and imposed penalty on the appellants, as detailed in the order-in-original. The Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the above said order-in-original on the ground that the duty demand, having been raised by alleging that the goods were classifiable under Heading No. 84.79 of the CETA, cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observed, that it is not possible for the authorities below to consider the case which had not been laid down in the show cause notice. The classification of the goods which was not proposed in the show cause notice, could not be considered and that the Tribunal was wrong in so doing, rather should have dismissed the appeal of the Department. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
