NITHYANANDA ELECTRONICS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., MANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises from Order -in -Appeal No. 328/2005 -C.E. dated 30 -12 -2005. The Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the assessee are carrying on the business of marketing and distribution on behalf of M/s. Zee Turner in terms of their Distribution Agreement. He has, therefore, rejected the refund claim of Rs. 35,339/ - and confirmed Order -in -Original No. 33/2005 dated 8 -8 -2005. The matter has come up for hearing on six occasions and the appellants have been informed to produce the Order -in -Original and a copy of the Agreement with M/s. Zee Turner. Despite these directions given, the appellants have not been in a position to produce both the documents.

(2.) THE learned JDR submits that the matter is required to be dismissed for non -production of copy of the Order -in -Original and the Agreement with M/s. Zee Turner in terms of Rule 11 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules.

(3.) HEARD the learned Consultant. The Consultant submits that in his records, both the papers are not available. However, he will make attempts to procure the same.