TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 1161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - - Dated:- 28-4-2010 - Shri Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, President and Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical) For the appellant : Sh. Ramesh Nair Sh. R.K. Hasija, Advocates For the respondent : Sh. R.K. Verma, Advocate JUDGEMENT Per: Shri Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar: Since common questions of law and facts arise in all these matters they were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. In all these matters issue involved relates to denial of SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/93-CE dated 28.2.93 on the ground that the different units were not independent units and they were liable to be clubbed together to consider the claim regarding the said exemption. 3. Pursua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessees. As against the orders against the assessees, they are in appeal whereas in case of orders in favour of the assessees, the Department has filed the appeals. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the order of the High Court in Writ Petition NO. 2131-2138/2000 only point which arises for consideration is whether the parties should be entitled to pursue the present remedy of the appeal in relation to the merits of the case or whether the matters will have to go back before the Commissioner to be decided alongwith matters which have been remanded by the High Court. 6. The Hon ble High Court, while disposing the Writ Petition and remanding the matter, has observed thus:- 8. After havi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me Washers (P) Ltd., vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune 2003 (151) ELT 14 (S.C) (supra). Ratio laid down by Supreme Court in these decisions is squarely applicable to present bunch. 9. In view of the aforesaid, there is no hesitation in the mind of this Court to accept the preliminary contention of learned senior counsel for the petitioners and set aside the order impugned passed by the Tribunal and refer the matter back to the adjudicatory authority for a fresh decision in accordance with law. Needless to say that, this Court has not examined or touched merits of other various contentions, therefore, adjudicatory authority while deciding the matter afresh would not preclude from giving its own decision. This is equally applicable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 30.3.98 in relation to the merits of the case stand set aside and adjudicating authority is required to adjudicate upon all the issues afresh and is required to arrive at an appropriate finding based on the materials on record before the authority. It is also undisputed fact that in all the proceedings where the impugned orders have been passed, the same had proceeded solely on the basis of the finding arrived at by the Commissioner in the order dated 30.3.98 and on the basis that similar situation and circumstances prevail the impugned orders came to be passed. Even in cases, where the matters have been dropped, certain issues have been decided solely on the basis of the order dated 30.3.98. In this background, simultaneously all th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
