9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (2) TMI 479 - HC - Central Excise100% EOU - Time limitation - Whether the Tribunal is justified in dismissing the appeals filed by the revenue following Larger Bench decision in the case of CCE v. LML Ltd., Scooter Division, 2002 (6) TMI 59 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI without considering the appeal of the revenue filed within limitation on merits solely on the ground that the appeals were filed much after orders were passed in the appeal of the assessee? Held that - when in respect of 100% EOU Permission to sell goods manufactured by them in DTA in accordance with paragraph 9.9 of the EXIM Policy, Government cannot go beyond such permission and dispute the value of clearance allowed by the competent authority, which in the case was the Development Commissioner. In view the decision in case of Commissioner of C. Ex. & Cus. Versus Sabnam Synthetics Ltd. 2010 (2) TMI 1136 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT , no fruitful purpose would be served in remanding the matter to the learned tribunal to consider the issue on merits which is already concluded against the revenue in view of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Virlon Textile Mills Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai, 2007 (4) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA as well as decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of very assessee and against the very impugned judgement and order passed by the adjudicating authority 2010 (2) TMI 1136 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT . Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
Issues:
1. Dismissal of appeals by the tribunal without considering merits 2. Applicability of Larger Bench decision in the case of LML Ltd. 3. Remand of the matter to the tribunal for consideration on merits Analysis: Issue 1: Dismissal of appeals by the tribunal without considering merits The appellant, the revenue, challenged the impugned order of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, which dismissed the appeals without delving into the merits. The tribunal based its decision on the ground that the assessee's appeal against the same judgment was previously dismissed. The appellant contended that the tribunal should have considered their appeals on their own merits, regardless of the earlier dismissal of the assessee's appeal. Issue 2: Applicability of Larger Bench decision in the case of LML Ltd. The tribunal's dismissal of the revenue's appeals was influenced by the Larger Bench decision in the case of CCE v. LML Ltd., Scooter Division. The appellant argued that the decision should not apply to their case as their appeals were based on different grounds. They emphasized that the tribunal should have analyzed their appeals independently on merit. Issue 3: Remand of the matter to the tribunal for consideration on merits The appellant urged for a remand of the matter to the tribunal for a thorough consideration of their appeals on merits. They highlighted the pendency of a related case before the Supreme Court, which they believed the tribunal should have taken into account. However, the court noted that the issue on merits had already been conclusively decided against the revenue by the Supreme Court and a Division Bench of the High Court. Therefore, the court dismissed the appeal, stating that no purpose would be served by remanding the matter for further consideration. In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal by the revenue, as the issue on merits had already been settled against them by higher courts. The court found no need to delve into the applicability of the Larger Bench decision or remand the matter to the tribunal for a fresh consideration.
|
