9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 788X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Appellant. Shri Nikhil Nayyar, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Leave granted. 2. Both these appeals, filed by the Union of India/Central Board of Excise & Customs, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 27th June, 2007 passed by the Madras High Court [2007 (217) E.L.T. 167 (Mad.)] and dated 21st November, 2007 passed by Punjab and Haryana High Court [2008 (229) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndings in Paragraph 8 of the impugned judgments, which also deals with the issue that was required to be considered in these matters. 6. The issue that was raised before the High Court was whether the items imported by the members of the Appellant (Respondents herein) are "used steel rails" or "waste/scrap" is essentially a question of fact, that is to be decided by the authorities under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Authorities or the Appellate Authorities in the matter of deciding disputes between the persons who are called upon to pay duty and the department. Relying on the aforesaid findings, Counsel appearing for the Respondents, have submitted before us that unless the Quasi judicial Authority is allowed to function independently and impartially, the order passed by it cannot be said to be the order pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the basis of all the materials available on record including the evidence, the Assessing Authority has come to an independent finding on its own and therefore, in our considered opinion, the matter can now be allowed to be determined by the Assessing Authority in the light of the aforesaid observations. 8. It must be added that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claims ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
