Commissioner Of Central Excise, Pune vs M/S. Sandvik Asia Ltd
- CitationAPPEAL NO. E/447/10-MUM
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal dismisses the Revenue's appeal without examining the merits, because the duty involved is below Rs. 5 lakhs, and under the Government Litigation Policy (as read with the High Court decisions cited) an appeal in such a case is not to be pursued on merits.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in- Appeal No. PI/VSK/4/2010 dtd. 7/1/2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise Pune-I]
For approval and signature:
Honble Mr Ramesh Nair, Member(Judicial)
=======================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No 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 : seen of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?
=======================================================
Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune- 1 :
Appellants
VS
M/s. Sandvik Asia Ltd. :
Respondent
Appearance
Shri. Ashitosh Nath, Asst. Commissioner (A.R.) for the Appellants None for the Respondent
CORAM:
Honble Mr. Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial)
Date of hearing: 27/2/2015 Date of decision 27/2/2015
ORDER NO.
Per : Ramesh Nair
This is Revenues Appeal against order passed by the Commissioner(Appeals). I find that the duty amount involved is less than Rs. Five Lakhs and in view of the Government Litigation Policy Vide F. No. 390/MISC/163/2010/JC dated 17/8/2011 read with Honble High Court of Karnataka judgment in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex., Bangalore-III V/s. Presscom Products [2011(268) E.L.T. 344(Kar)] and Honble High Court Gujarat judgments- Commissioner of C. Ex. & Cus., Surat-I V/s. Shreenath Fabrics [2014 (303) E.L.T. 540(Guj)] and Commr. of C.Ex. & Cus., Vadodara-I V/s. Pharmanza Herbal Pvt. Ltd[2014(306)E.L.T. 153(Guj)] the appeal is dismissed without going into merit of the issue. (Dictated in court)
Ramesh Nair Member (Judicial))
sk
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