TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 761X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Dy. Commissioner to rely on the record of personal hearing held on 18-3-1994 as the same has been challenged before higher authorities in the earlier round of litigation - benefit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/3374/2005-Mum - Final Order No. A/93065/2016-WZB/EB - Dated:- 29-9-2016 - Shri M.V. Ravindran, Member (J) and Raju, Member (T) Shri Nikhil Run ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f-machining is not carried out and therefore, the benefit of exemption under Notification 275/88 should be held to be available to these goods. We find that this plea was raised by the appellant in the appeal filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) and has been noted in the order, but no finding has been recorded thereon. Since we are not in a position to categorically hold as to whether any proof ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find out if the process of proof-machining was carried out on SG Iron castings and Spacer rings and if no proof-machining was carried out on these two items, benefit of Notification No. 275/88 should be extended. He argued that in the second round of litigation the Dy. Commissioner has simply relied on the record of personal hearing held on 18-3-1994 in the first round of litigation and confirmed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other than whatever already examined in the first round of litigation. 4. Learned AR reiterated the impugned order. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the remand was very specific and intended to verify if proof-machining was done on SG Iron castings and Spacer rings. The lower authorities have conducted physical verification but not relied on the fact. According to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
