TMI Blog2004 (9) TMI 110X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notification. The CEGAT, while dealing with the appeals of the revenue did not specifically refer to the conclusions of the first appellate authority and did not indicate any reason as to why it was of the view that the conclusions were not correct. Least that was required to be done was to indicate reasons for differing with the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals)'s order. CEGAT has power to di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ating that the benefits available under Notification No. 297/1979, as amended, were not available to it, and it was not entitled to exemption from Additional Excise Duty. The appellant filed its reply and submitted that the notification was clearly applicable. The adjudicating authority did not accept the stand of the appellant and held that the benefits under the notification were not available t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ior Counsel appearing for the respondent supported the order of the CEGAT. 5. We find that the first appellate authority, i.e. the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) had indicated reasons as to why it found the assessee-appellant to be entitled to benefits under the concerned notification. The CEGAT, while dealing with the appeals of the revenue did not specifically refer to the conclusions o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
