TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e mark for India, the adjudicating authority as well as the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in denying the benefit of the notification under consideration. Appeal dismissed. - 2534-2535 of 2001 - - - Dated:- 12-4-2006 - Ashok Bhan and Devinder Kumar Jain, JJ. [Order]. - These are statutory appeals filed under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short 'the Act') against Final Order No. C-II/3124-25/WZB/2000 dated 27th October, 2000 passed by the Customs, Excise Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, West Regional Bench at Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Appeal Nos. E/3691-R/98-Mum and E/254/2000-Mum. By the impugned order the Tribunal has allowed Appeal No. E/3691-R/98 filed by the respondent-assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order in original dated 14th October, 1991 granted exemption to the assessee under Notification No. 140/83-C.E. The said order was confirmed by Collector (Appeals) of Central Excise, Mumbai in Order-in-Appeal No. GS/506/D-II/93. Against the order of the Collector (Appeals), an appeal was filed by the Revenue in New Delhi Bench of the Tribunal which was dismissed vide its Order-in-Appeal No. 3461/91-C dated 7th July, 1998 reported as Collector of Central Excise, Bombay v. Bigen Industries 1999 (107) E.L.T. 213 (T). The order of the Tribunal became final between the parties as the Revenue did not challenge the said order by filing appeal to this Court. 4.A search was conducted at the residence of the proprietor of the respondent-company on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 12,75,877/- was confirmed. Penalty of Rs. 12.05 lakhs as well as fine were also imposed. 7.The order of the adjudicating authority was confirmed in appeal by the Commissioner. Assessee filed an appeal in respect of the period for which the demand was confirmed i.e. April 1988 to 11th of August, 1989 and from 26th of August, 1991 to March, 1993. The Revenue preferred the appeal in respect of the excluded period i.e. 12th of August, 1989 to 28th of August, 1991. Tribunal accepted the appeal filed by the assessee and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Revenue has not filed further appeal against the order of the Tribunal in respect of the excluded period, and therefore, the same has become final. 8.The Tribunal in the impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
