Common order passed by Commr(A) - Five separate appeals to be filed before CESTAT
THE appellants filed "five" appeals before the Commissioner(A), Mumbai.
The Commissioner (A) passed "a" common order [shown in the preamble as numbered YDB/253/TH.I/2011 dated 03/11/2011].
Before the CESTAT, the appellant assessee filed "one" composite appeal.
The Registry objected and asked the appellant to file "five" separate appeals.
The appellant filed a miscellaneous application against this "objection" raised by the Registry.
It is their submission that as the impugned order is common for "5" appeals filed before the Commissioner (A), one composite appeal can be filed before the CESTAT against such order in view of the decisions in Alliance Mills (Lessees) Ltd. vs. CCE, Calcutta (2002-TIOL-511-CESTAT-KOL) and in case of Eicher Motors Ltd. vs. CCE, Indore (2002-TIOL-326-CESTAT-DEL-LB). Inasmuch as the objection raised by the Registry needs to be set aside, the appellant submitted.
The Bench observed -
"2. Heard the ld. Counsel and perused the decisions relied upon. In the case of Alliance Mills (supra) we find that the impugned order number is 3/Cal.II/94 dated 27.01.1994. In that case the impugned order was only one and one number was given to that impugned order. We further find that in the case of Eicher Motors Ltd. (supra), the decision of the Alliance Mills decision has been relied on and in the case of Eicher Motors Ltd. the impugned order-in-original wherein 32 show-cause notices were disposed of by the adjudicating authority by a single order. We have perused the impugned order before us wherein 5 separate numbers have been given by the first appellate authority. In the circumstances, both the decisions are not relevant in this case. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the Misc. application before us. The same is dismissed. The applicants are directed to file remaining appeals within 15 days."
In fine, the Miscellaneous Application was dismissed.