TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 78X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fication. The said Bonds have been appropriated against the refund amount of ₹ 17,34,292/-. The contention of the Appellant that the observation of the Tribunal in its order dated 30.6.2003 should not be followed, in my opinion, is misplaced, inasmuch as, no Appeal has been filed by either sides and the said order has been pursued by the Appellant in various forums. Appeal dismissed - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without payment of duty in accordance with the provision of Rule 191 BB of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Notification No.33/90-Central Excise (NT) dated 5.9.90. 4. Since the quantity of PSF were not used in the manufacture of finished product, accordingly, demand notice was issued on 8.8.95 for recovery of duty of ₹ 18,06,554/- with interest and penalty and also appro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the said order, they filed Appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, rejected their Appeal. Thereafter, the Appellant approached the Tribunal and by its order dated 15.12.2008, it was directed to the original authority to furnish the details of the Bonds enforced by the Department. Thereafter, the Appellant filed Special Civil Application before the Hon ble Gujarat High Court, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epartment is at liberty to enforce the Bonds. It is his contention that this observation of the Tribunal is legally termed as obiter dictum . Hence, the Department s direction for enforcement of the Bonds is bad in law. 6. Ld. A.R. for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). He has submitted that the plea raised by the Appellant that the direction of the Tribun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
