TMI Blog2005 (3) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 35(H)(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944, consequent upon the decision rendered by CEGAT in appeal filed by the respondent being Appeal No. E/2164/99-Mum., which in turn arises out of Order-in-Original No. 15-Comr/C/Ex/Ind/99, dated 19-3-1999 decided by Commissioner of Central Excise. It is the case of applicant i.e. Commissioner, Central Excise that following question of law arises out of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earned Counsel for the non-applicant. 4. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused record of the case, we are of the view that question proposed by the applicant i.e. Commissioner, Central Excise does arise out of the appellate order, referred supra and secondly, it being a referable question of law requiring interpretation of two tariff entries, the same deserves to be all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the applicant is a question of law as contemplated under Section 35H sub-section (2) read with sub-section (4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and hence, the same needs to be answered by this Court in exercise of our powers conferred under the law. We are not satisfied with the submission made by the learned Counsel for the assessee when he contended that it is a question of fact. 7. Accordingl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
