Gujarat High Court High Court

Commissioner vs Counsel For The Appellant Placed … on 22 September, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Commissioner vs Counsel For The Appellant Placed … on 22 September, 2011
Author: Akil Kureshi, Gokani,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

TAXAP/213/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

TAX
APPEAL No. 213 of 2011
 

 


 

=========================================================

 

COMMISSIONER
OF CENTRAL EXCISE - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

M/S
DEEYAKAR ALUMINIUM PVT LTD - Opponent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
RJ OZA for
Appellant(s) : 1, 
None for Opponent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
		
	

 

Date
: 22/09/2011 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)

1.0
Counsel for the appellant placed on record the copy of the judgment
of the Tribunal impugned in this appeal.

2.0
By the impugned judgment dated 18.02.2008 CESTAT had disposed of two
cross appeals. Appeal by the assessee came to be allowed placing
reliance on the decision of Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case
of Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. vs. C.C.E.,
Vadodara
reported in 2007
(208) ELT 342. In view of
allowing of such appeal, Revenue’s appeal against non-imposition of
penalty and interest came to be dismissed as having become
infructuous. Against this portion of the order the Revenue is before
us by way of this appeal.

3.0
We may notice that insofar as the assessee’s appeal was allowed by
the Tribunal by the impugned judgment, the Revenue had carried the
matter in appeal before us. Such appeal being Tax Appeal No.1132 of
2009 came to be allowed by
our order dated 24th
March, 2011. In view of the reversal of the Tribunal’s decision with
respect to quantum additions, the question of penalty and interest
would revive and the same would have to be, in our prima
facie opinion,
considered by the Tribunal.

4.0
In view of above situation, issue Notice
for
final disposal returnable on 20th
October, 2011. Direct Service permitted.

5.0
In case respondent is not found at the last known address, it
would be open for the appellant to serve such notice by affixing the
same on any conspicuous part of the premise at the last known
address.

[AKIL
KURESHI, J.]

[Ms.

SONIA GOKANI, J.]

Amit

   

Top