Posted On by &filed under Gujarat High Court, High Court.


Gujarat High Court
J vs Unknown on 17 March, 2011
Author: Akil Kureshi,&Nbsp;Ms Gokani,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

TAXAP/1820/2009	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

TAX
APPEAL No. 1820 of 2009
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 414 of 2009
 

In


 

TAX APPEAL No. 1820 of
2009 
=========================================================

 

J
M PERFUMERY (UNIT-II) - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

COMMISSIONER
OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS - Opponent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
PARESH M DAVE for
Appellant(s) : 1, 
RULE SERVED for Opponent(s) : 1, 
MR RJ OZA
for Opponent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
		
	

 

Date
: 17/03/2011 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)

1. This
appeal is directed against an order of the CESTAT, dated 10.10.2008.

2. The
case of the appellant is that the Tribunal has wholly mis-directed
itself by considering the manufacturing activity of the entire Unit
and passed the order, which, despite being pointed out through the
Application for Rectification, the Tribunal failed to correct the
same.

3. We
are unable to entertain the contentions of the appellant on the
simple ground that, as rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for
the Revenue, the issue involved is one of the appropriate
classification of the goods and on which basis what appropriate rate
of duty should be charged. This being the question covered by
Clause-(b) of Section-35-L of the Central Excise Act, 1944, an appeal
would lie before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and not before this Court.

4. In
view of the above discussion and in view of the decision of the
Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of “Commissioner of
Central Excise, Mumbai Vs. Bharat Bijlee Limited”
reported in 2006(198)E.L.T.489(S.C.), this
appeal is DISPOSED OF,
in the above terms.

5. Since,
the appeal is disposed of, civil application shall not survive and it
also stands DISPOSED OF,
accordingly.

(AKIL
KURESHI,J.)

(Ms.

SONIA GOKANI,J.)

Umesh/

   

Top


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

105 queries in 0.137 seconds.