9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (12) TMI 945 - HC - Central ExciseConfiscation of goods - Invocation of extended period of limitation - Held that - Assessee is aggrieved with that part of the order wherein it is stated that the appellants have no case on merits whereas the Revenue is aggrieved with the findings of the learned CESTAT that the extended period of limitation was not invokable. We find that in the interest of justice both the appeals deserve to be allowed by remitting the matter back to the learned Members of the CESTAT for considering the issue afresh by considering the rival submissions on behalf of both the parties. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of Revenue.
Issues: Cross-appeals filed by Revenue and Assessee challenging CESTAT order on extended limitation period, goods liability, penalties, and merits.
Analysis: 1. Extended Limitation Period: The CESTAT observed that the extended period of limitation was not invokable, leading to the goods not being liable for confiscation. The Revenue was aggrieved by this finding. The High Court found that the issue required further consideration and remanded the matter back to the CESTAT for a fresh decision after considering both parties' submissions. 2. Goods Liability and Penalties: The CESTAT also noted that penalties were not warranted in the case. The Assessee was specifically aggrieved by the part of the order stating that they had no case on merits. The High Court, in the interest of justice, allowed both appeals and directed the CESTAT to reconsider the issue by evaluating the merits and submissions of both parties. 3. Remand and Directions: The High Court allowed the appeals and remanded the matter to the CESTAT for a fresh decision within three months. The Court emphasized the need for a thorough consideration of the issue, including the extended limitation period, goods liability, penalties, and merits, to ensure a just outcome. No costs were awarded in this judgment. This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues involved, the findings of the CESTAT, the grievances of the parties, and the High Court's decision to remand the matter for a fresh consideration by the CESTAT, emphasizing the importance of evaluating all aspects of the case in the interest of justice.
|
