COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. PRIYADARSHINI CABLE LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We may notice that the present appeal has been filed after a delay of 169 days for which hardly any cogent reason has been stated in the application. Be that as it may, we would allow the said application and consider the merits of the appeal. CM is, accordingly, disposed of.

(2.) This is an appeal under Section 35H(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is directed against the order passed by the Custom, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal on 28th February, 2003. Rather then referring to the facts of the case we would prefer to the finding recorded by the Tribunal which reads as under:-

(3.) The basic contention raised on behalf of the Appellant before us now is that the mere receipt of goods per say would not amount to CEAC 4/2005 page 3 of 5 admission of a fact that documents were produced and the assessed was entitled to the benefit granted to them under the said impugned order.