TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty by the Commissioner in the present impugned order - The appeal is hence rejected - E/454/2008 - 493/2011 - Dated:- 17-3-2011 - Ms. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, JJ. Shri K.Sankararaman, Advocate For the Appellant/s Shri V.Balasubramanian, Advocate, Ms.Indira Sisupal, JDR For the Respondent/s Per Jyoti Balasundaram The facts leading to the present appeal are that the assessees M/s.Premier Footwear Products (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as PFP), who are manufacturers of Micro-cellular Rubber Sole sheets for Hawaii chappals and Strap sheets (plap) for straps of Hawaii chappals had not paid excise duty on the above products manufactured in their factory at Pollachi and removed to their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a sheet of vulcanized rubber (other than hard rubber) of non-cellular structure, from which structures for Hawaii chappals could be manufactured, and accordingly, excise duty is leviable thereon. The Tribunal upheld the applicability of the larger period of limitation and remanded the case to the Commissioner for re-quantification of duty payable by M/s.PFP on strap sheets for the period in dispute, as well as for re-determination of penalty, and set aside the penalties imposed M/s.KFP and Joy Verghese. Appeal No.E/743/05 was, therefore, disposed of by directing the lower authority to re-quantify the duty demand on strap sheets and to re-determine the penalty on M/s.PFP, and Appeal Nos.E/744 745/05 were allowed. 2. Pursuant to the ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssification issued afresh. It is also not open to the Tribunal to depart from the view already expressed on the classification of the goods in question as the final order cited supra has become final and to take a different view on classification would amount to review, which power is not vested in the Tribunal. The judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in Ratanlal Kisandas Vs Bajirao Ganpat Mahalasne and 2 Others [(1975) Maharashtra Law Journal 65] relied upon by Shri K.Sankararaman, learned counsel for the assessees to support his contention that remand order will not operate as res judicata so as to preclude the remanding court from reopening it at the subsequent stage of the same continuing proceedings even when the law underlyi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the remanding court at another stage cannot be ruled out. In the present case, however, the issue on merits has been finally decided by the Tribunal s earlier order of 2006 and the case was remanded to the Commissioner only for arithmetical calculation, namely, for working out the amount of duty to be paid by the assessees on the strap sheets for the relevant period and for re-determining the penalty amount. 4. The judgment of the apex court in Palace Administration Board Vs Rama Varma Bharathan Thampuran and others [1980 Supp. SCC 234] relied upon by the assessees to support the plea for reconsideration of the classification is permissible in law is also distinguishable as the Supreme Court was hearing a review petition while t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
