Cce & St, Raipur vs Bhilai Steel Plant
- CitationExcise Appeal No.E/51734/2014 EX. [SM]
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and the matter is remanded to the original authority, because verification of whether the disputed goods were used in the respective machines or machinery installed in the respondent's factory is required before the question can be decided.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.03(CE)/RPR-II/2014 dated 07.01.2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Raipur]
For approval and signature:
HONBLE MR. S.K. MOHANTY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
1. Whether Press reporters may be allowed to see the
order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT
(Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in
any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
authorities?
__________________________________________________
CCE & ST, Raipur Appellant
Vs.
Bhilai Steel Plant Respondent
Present for the Appellant : Shri M.S.Negi, DR
Present for the Respondent: Shri Vipul Agrawal, Advocate
Coram: HONBLE MR. S.K. MOHANTY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
Date of Hearing/Decision: 24.06.2015
Final ORDER NO. 54120/2015
PER: S.K. MOHANTY
Revenue has filed this appeal against the impugned order dated 07.01.2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Raipur. In the grounds of appeal, the prayer of Revenue is to remand the matter to the Original Authority for verification of use of the capital items in the machines installed in the factory premises of the respondent.
2. Heard the ld. counsel for both side and perused the records.
3. I find that the matter can be remanded for verification of usage of the disputed goods in the factory. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the original authority for verification with regard to the use of the disputed goods in the respective machines/machinery installed in the factory of the respondent. The appeal is allowed by way of remand.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
(S.K. MOHANTY)
MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
Anita
??
??
??
??
0 2
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free