2016 (9) TMI 621

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ct, 1962 - sub-section (2A) of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 - assets of the respondent-company were taken over by the financial institution and sold, is under challenge - closure of respondent's business - Held that: - the decision in the case Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur v. Vidarbha Veneer Industries Ltd. and others [2016 (8) TMI 707 - SUPREME COURT] is followed - appeal disposed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e respondents ? (b) Whether the CESTAT is justified in allowing the appeal of the respondents by holding that exemption notification No. 111/95-Cus., dated 5.6.1995, is a self contained code and it mentions benefits, obligations and circumstances and no action outside the notification is attracted and called for in regard to imports made and, hence, setting aside the confiscation and imposit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hile referring to order dated 18.7.2016, passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 4479-4488 of 2008-Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur v. Vidarbha Veneer Industries Ltd. and others, submitted that in view of the aforesaid development, the present appeal may be disposed of at this stage, however, with liberty to the department to get the same revived, in case the respondent- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X