9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 899X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Court is so far not challenged before Honourable the Apex Court and therefore, it holds the field, we are of the opinion that the CESTAT (West Zonal) Bench, Ahmedabad has not committed any error or irregularities in rejecting the appeal of the Revenue by the impugned order. - no substantial questions are involved in this appeal - Decided against Revenue. - Tax Appeal No. 453 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 11-8-2015 - A. J. Desai And A. G. Uraizee, JJ. For the Appellant : Mrs VD Nanavati, Adv. For the Respondent : None JUDGMENT (Per : Honourable Mr. Justice A. G. Uraizee) 1. The Revenue has filed this appeal under section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 to challenge Order No. A/10035/2015 dated 8/1/2015 passed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d until 15.01.2015and the impugned order is passed on 08.01.2015? e. Whether Hon'ble Tribunal can treat Rule8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002unconstitutional and demand for payment of duty from cenvat account current void when the issue of constitutionality of Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 has not yet attained finality in view of the fact that order of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of M/s Indsur Global Ltd reported in 2014 (310) E.L.T. 833 (Guj) has not yet attained finality as the department is in the process of approaching the Hon'ble Apex Court? f. Whether Hon'ble Tribunal can treat Rule8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002unconstitutional and demand for recovery of interest under Section 11AB ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 read with Section 11Aof the Central Excise Act, 1944 along with interest and impose penalty. Adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and imposed penalty. Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the adjudication order. 4. We have heard learned advocate Mrs. V. D. Nanavati appearing for the appellant. Mrs. Nanavati, learned advocate appearing for the appellant would submit that the CESTAT has committed serious error in rejecting the appeal of the appellant relying upon the judgement of this Court in the case of Indsur Global Ltd Vs. Union of India reported in 2014 (310) E.L.T. 833 (Guj). 5. She would further submit that the department is contemplating to challenge the judgement of this Court in case of Indsur (supra) in the Hon'ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
