9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 828X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in favor of assessee by way of remand to Commissioner(A) - 924 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 11-7-2011 - Arun Tandon, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri M.P. Devnath and Nishant Mishra, Counsels, for the Petitioner. S/Shri S.P. Kesarwani, SSC and Shambu Chopra, Counsel, for the Respondent. [Order]. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. M/s. Optho Remedies Pvt. Ltd. has filed this writ petition against an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in proceedings under Section 35-F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (herein after referred to as the Act, 1944) in a pending Appeal under Section 35-A of the Act, 1944. 3. Petitioner Company had challenged the order-in-original made by the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndra Metal Works v. C.C.E., Bombay-II reported in 2002 (141) E.L.T. 480 (Tribunal - Del.), Ashok Pharmaceuticals v. C.C.E., Chennai reported in 2004 (169) E.L.T. 103 (Tribunal - Chennai), Releef Pharmaceuticals v. C.C.E., Aurangabad reported in 2006 (195) E.L.T. 78 (Tribunal - Mumbai) and Omega Pharmaceuticals v. C.C.E., Surat reported in 2006 (196) E.L.T. 332 (Tribunal - Mumbai) were specifically referred and relied in support of the contention that the computation of the aggregate value of the goods manufactured by the loan licensee is not to be added for the purposes calculating the aggregate value of the clearance of goods made by the petitioner company. He submits that the judgment of the Tribunal which are binding upon the Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore, in such proceedings, it is not necessary to deal with the judgments relied upon by the petitioner in extensio. He further points out that the judgment relied up by the petitioner are those of the Tribunal only. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present writ petition. 10. No purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending inasmuch interest of substantial justice would be served by disposing of the petitioner as under. 11. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of I.T.C. Ltd. v. Commissioner (Appeals), CUS. C. Ex., Meerut-I reported in 2005 (184) E.L.T. 347 (All.) in paragraph 35 has held as follows : In view of the above, the aforesaid authorities make it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of deposit should also be allowed where two views are possible. While considering the application for interim relief, the Court must examine all pros and cons involved in the case and further examine that in case recovery is not stayed, the right of the appeal conferred by the legislature and refusal to exercise the discretionary power by the authority to stay/waive the pre-deposit condition, would be reduced nugatory/illusory. Undoubtedly, the interest of the Revenue cannot be jeopardized but that does not mean that in order to protect the interest of the Revenue, the Court or Authority should exercise its duty under the law to take into consideration the rights and interest of an individual. It is also clear that before any goods could ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
