9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 61 - AT - Central ExciseRestoration of Appeals Clearance from Committee of Disputes Held that - There is no subsisting issue between the assessee and the Revenue inasmuch as the decision taken by the tribunal on the substantive issue was upheld in Commissioner vs. BPCL 1998 (12) TMI 580 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA - express permission is not required for the appellant to pursue the appeals - the appeals for want of clearance has to be recalled ROA application allowed Decided in favour of Assessee.
Issues:
Restoration of dismissed appeals due to lack of clearance from the Committee on Disputes. Analysis: The appellant filed applications seeking restoration of two appeals (No. E/1582 & 1583/1998) dismissed for lack of clearance from the Committee on Disputes. The Committee noted that a similar matter was involved in all cases and had postponed consideration pending the Supreme Court's decision on a similar issue. The apex court had dismissed the department's appeal and upheld the decision of CESTAT, indicating finality against the department. The Dept. of Legal Affairs recommended not pressing the demand further, and the Committee directed the cases be treated as withdrawn by the appellant. Analysis: The learned counsel produced an order of this tribunal in a similar issue (valuation of petroleum products) in BPCL vs. CCE, upheld by the Supreme Court. The apex court dismissed the civil appeals filed by the department, affirming the tribunal's decision. The tribunal held that there was no subsisting issue between the assessee and the Revenue as the apex court upheld the tribunal's decision against the Revenue. The minutes of the committee indicated no express permission was needed for the appellant to pursue the appeals, leading to the recall of the final order dismissing the appeals and allowing them based on the tribunal's decision upheld by the apex court. Outcome: The ROA applications and the appeals were allowed, and the stay applications were disposed of. The decision was pronounced and dictated in open court.
|
