COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. Vs. LIFELINE REMEDIES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant revenue has proposed following three questions stated to be substantial questions of law arising out of order dated 7-11-2008 made by Customs, Excise & Service tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal):

(2.) Heard learned advocate for the Appellant. It was submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in ignoring condition laid down in Paragraph No. 2(vi) of Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. Similarly, in relation to the various orders of different Benches of Tribunal referred to in Paragraph Nos. 2 and 3 of the impugned order of Tribunal, it was submitted that different notifications were applicable in those cases decided by other Benches of Tribunal and hence, the impugned order of Tribunal is required to be interfered with. It was also submitted that the Tribunal was required to read the show cause notice and the order made by the adjudicating authority.

(3.) A plain reading of the impugned order of Tribunal indicates, in the first instance that, the appeal, which was filed by Respondent Assessee before Tribunal, was heard and decided ex-parte in absence of any appearance on behalf of the Assessee. However, the Appellant herein, Central Excise Department, was duly represented. The impugned order of Tribunal does not indicate that the junior departmental representative appearing before Tribunal urged any of the contentions raised in the present appeal for Tribunal to record a finding.