Shri Ravinder Narain, has stated that the appellant was bona fide proceeding on the basis that since this is a matter of valuation falling under Section 35L b in view of the order dated August 21, 1990, passed by the Eastern Regional Bench of the Tribunal whereby the matter was transferred to the Special Bench of the Tribunal for disposal on the ground that the point for decision would involve a question of the value of the goods which subject falls within the jurisdiction of the Special Bench of the Tribunal.The said question relating to value of goods has, however, arisen on the claims for refund of excise duty submitted by the appellant before the Assistant Collector.
These appeals filed under Section 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944 hereinafter referred to as The Act are directed against the judgment of the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi hereinafter referred to as The Act dated January 31, 1997.
Shri Ravinder Narain has submitted that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal relates to the value of goods.
A perusal of the said clause shows that an appeal lies to this Court against an order passed by the Tribunal relating to the determination of any question relating to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for the purposes of assessment.
Any order passed by the Appellate Tribunal relating, among other things, to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for purposes of assessment.
Shri Ravinder Narain has invoked Clause b of Section 35L which reads as follows 35L b .
It is only when the goods were returned, the question of refund arose.
We have heard Shri Ravinder Narain, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant on these appeals.
The assessment had been companypleted in the present case and assessment orders had already been passed.
