1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION jmi CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 34 OF 2005. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-I. ..Appellant. v/s. M/s. Sukrim Synthetics Processors. ..Respondent. .... Mr. S.D. Bhosale, for Appellant. None for Respondent. .... CORAM : V.C. DAGA & S.J. KATHAWALLA, JJ. DATE : 17TH AUGUST 2010. P.C. The learned Counsel for the Revenue submits that he could not comply with the orders dated 29th June 2010 and 26th July 2010, whereunder; time to produce record was granted to the Revenue so as to find correctness of the statement of the noticee recorded during the course of investigation. Since the record is not available, it is not possible to reconcile inconsistency noticed by the Court. It is not possible to take proper view of the matter unless record is made available. It is for the Revenue to substantiate their stand. As stated above, appeal cannot be decided on merits for want of record. 2. Appeal, thus, stands rejected with no order as to costs. [ S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. ] [ V.C. DAGA, J. ]