9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 583X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Shri R.V. Ramakrishnappa, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. - Both these appeals raise a common question of law and facts and hence they are taken up together for disposal as per law. The appellants' grievance is that the Commissioner (Appeals), by his OIA No. 50/2001 dated 24-1-2001, clearly upheld the assessees' contention that the assessments were provisional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... E.L.T. 114 and that of Needle Industries (I) Ltd. - 1998 (101) E.L.T. 286 when the duty liability could be negligible. He submits that the original authority, on de novo, did not follow the terms of the Commissioner (Appeals)'s OIA No. 50/2001-CE dated 24-1-2001 and on a different footing held that there was no provisional assessment. It is the contention of the learned Counsel that the OIA No. 50 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd has to be executed. He submits that a Bond had been executed effective from June 1998 and earlier assessments had been kept provisional and the matter had attained finality by OIA No. 50/2001 dated 24-1-2001. 2. The learned JDR reiterated the Commissioner's view and the Assistant Commissioner's view taking a new view that the assessments were not provisional. 3. On a careful conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave been finalized in terms of Mafatlal Industries judgment rendered by the Apex Court and followed by the Tribunal in the case of Star Paper Mills Ltd., and Needle Industries (I) Ltd. (supra). The impugned orders are not legal and proper and they are set aside and the matter remanded to the original authority to finalise the assessments and not come out with a fresh finding that the assessments w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
