2013 (11) TMI 1595

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt per : A. Selvam, J. (Common)]. - These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals have been preferred against the Final Order Nos. 655/2005 and 656/2005, dated 26-4-2005, confirmed in Appeal Nos. E/614/2004 and E/615/2004 by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai [2005 (191) E.L.T. 935 (Tri. - Chen.)]. 2. The respondent herein has been doing the business of co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2004 and E/615/2004 and Final Order Nos. 655/2005 and 656/2005, these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals have been preferred at the instance of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirunelveli as appellant. 3. At the time admitting these Civil Miscellaneous Appeal the following substantial questions of law have been settled for consideration : (a) Whether the CESTAT is right in holding that no int .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nterest and penalty and further it has been erroneously held that the show cause notice dated 20-8-2001 is barred by limitation and likewise the Appellate Tribunal has also erroneously given its finding with regard to the said aspect and therefore the orders referred to supra are liable to be set aside. 5. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent has contended that in Final Order No. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X