9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h as made in instant case- granting liberty to the parties to approach again when the cause of action had clearly arisen in the present and appeal had matured for adjudication - matter remitted for decision afresh - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Central Excise Appeal No. 112 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 23-3-2017 - Hon'ble Bharati Sapru And Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh, JJ. For the Appellant : Nishant Mishra For the Respondent : Krishna Agarawal ORDER This Central Excise Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) dated 29.11.2016 on the following questions of law : 1. Whether the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner, Central Excise, Meerut dated 28.11.2008 and the other by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise Hyderabad dated 28.3.2008. Under both those orders demands had been created against the assessee treating its activity to be of manufacture of photocopier machines etc. While the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal vide its order dated 9.11.2009 had set aside the order in the original passed by the Commissioner Central Excise Hyderabad dated 28.3.2008 and thus deleted the demand treating the activity of the assessee to be not of manufacture, however, a coordinate Bench of the same Tribunal at Delhi, vide its order dated 30.11.2010 had taken opposite view and held the activity of the assessee to be of manufacture and had thus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elhi does not agree with the reasons given by the CESTAT, Bangalore in its order dated 9.11.2009, it may refer the matter to the President of the Tribunal to be referred to a Larger Bench. Upon the matter being thus remitted to the Tribunal, it has not decided the appeal on merits. It has now passed the impugned order wherein it has taken note of the earlier judgment of this Court (in Central Excise Appeal No. 34 of 2011 decided on 25.7.2011) the Tribunal has observed that since that earlier judgment of this Court is under challenge pending before the Supreme Court in Special Appeal No. 6895-97 of 2012 and that the same has been tagged with another Civil Appeal No. 19252 of 2011 filed by the revenue against the order of the Bangalore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he same. At any rate, it cannot be accepted that in the matter of statutory appeal the Tribunal vested the jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter finally may, while dealing with an appeal duly maintainable before instead of deciding it on merits, wash its hands of it by making observation such as made in instant case- granting liberty to the parties to approach again when the cause of action had clearly arisen in the present and appeal had matured for adjudication. Appeals take time to mature for hearing before appellate forums like the CESTAT that have long list of pending cases. It would reflect poorly on the system if a litigant who has waited for years to get his appeal heard and decided finally, is sent out of the queue, like it h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
