- (1.) INTERPRETATION of Notification No. 11/97 -Cus dated 1.3.1997 happens to be the focus point for consideration in these eleven appeals. The Assistant Collector as well as the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) negatived the contentions raised by the Respondent herein as regards the import of the Notification and its applicability. The Respondent thereafter, however, approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal upon consideration of the facts of the matter under consideration, in particular having reference to Entry Nos. 105 and 114 came to the conclusion as below: We have considered the submissions and have perused the record. We find that the submissions made on behalf of the Appellants have strong force on a comparative examination of the entry as against S. Nos. 105 and 114. It is quite apparent that if the intention of the legislature was to restrict the benefit of the notification to cold rolled coils if they are not further worked, suitable qualifying words would have been inserted against S. No. 105 as had been done in the case of S. No. 114 of the Table to the said notification. We further note that the case law referred to by the ld. Counsel also support his contention. On plain reading of the entries as stated above, we do not find any infirmity in the order neither the findings warrant any interference. In that view of the matter, these appeals fail and are hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.
(2.) THESE fourteen appeals arise from an order of the Tribunal wherein the Tribunal simply recorded that the appeals are allowed with consequential relief. We, however, feel it expedient to record and we have been informed form the bar that the refund applications are still pending before the appropriate authorities. On the wake of the aforesaid, we do not intend to deal with the matter any further and direct that the refund applications be dealt with by the concerned authorities in accordance with law with expedition. The appeals are disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.;