2011 (6) TMI 511

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Appellant. Shri K.S. Ravishankar, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Judgment per : N. Kumar, J.]. - All these appeals are preferred by the Revenue which are admitted by this Court to consider the following substantial questions of law. (i)      Whether under the facts and circumstance of the case the Tribunal is right in modifying the demand though respondent have wron .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nder Central Excise Act and at any rate as Carbon Monoxide and no duty is payable. The authorities have disallowed the claim of the Revenue regarding levy of penalty on the ground that it is barred by law of limitation and confirmed the levy. 5. To the extent confirming the demand the assessee has already approached the Apex Court under Section 35-L of the Central Excise Act and they are num .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... arise out of the very same order, it is settled law that these issues cannot be bifurcated and decided by this court. It is a composite order, this issue also has to be decided by Apex Court and Revenue has to file appeal under Section 35-L of the Central Excise Act before the Apex Court. This Court has no jurisdiction to entertain these appeals. 7. Therefore, these appeals are rejected as n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X