TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 1183X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal should have been a speaking order dealing with the reasoning given by the Commissioner and stating as to why the said reasoning was faulty. - issue as to whether the product is marketable or not was not even raised by the respondent in reply to the show cause notice nor was it argued before the Commissioner and therefore on that ground the Tribunal could not have allowed the appeal. We find that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited above is applicable in the facts of the present case and in our considered opinion, the new ground which the applicant is seeking to raise cannot be raised at this stage as the ground is not purely legal in nature. Consequently, we do not find any merit in the applications moved by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in 2007 (210) ELT 534 (T) (iii) Reliance Industrial Products vs. CCE reported in 2010 (260) ELT 312 (T) (iv) S C Products vs. CCE reported in 2008 (223) ELT 295 (T) (v) GOI vs. Madras Rubber Factory Ltd. reported in 1995 (77) ELT 433 (SC). He further submitted that the duty calculation should be made considering invoice value as cum duty price and the demand confirmed should be recalculated by considering invoice value as cum duty price. 3. On the other hand, the learned AR has filed written submissions opposing the additional grounds on the following grounds:- (i) As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Commissioner of Cus. C. Ex., Goa Versus Dempo Engineering Works Ltd. [2015 (319) ELT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which legal pleas cannot stand. The Hon'ble CESTAT has held the above proposition in their judgment in the case of Hindustan Organic Chem. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Mumbai-VII [2010 (251) ELT 454 (Tri.-Mumbai) - para 3. (v) The proposition that no new grounds can be admitted at the appeal stage is also admitted by the Hon'ble CESTAT in the case of Standard Pencils Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chennai [2006 (197) ELT 346 (Tri. - Del.)]. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the records. 5. We have gone through the judgments cited at bar by both the parties. It is pertinent to note that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE vs. Dempo Engineering Works Ltd. reported in 2015 (319) ELT 359 (SC), has ob ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
