M/S.Bhor Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-v
Case brief
What is this about?
This writ petition concerned the recovery of excise duty and reversal of MODVAT credit. The High Court held that the Appellate Tribunal misdirected itself and lacked jurisdiction because it based its order on a new case not made in the show cause notice.
What did the court decide?
The direction of the tribunal directing the Assistant Commissioner to recover duty was set aside.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 2647 OF 2002
M/s. Bhor Industries Ltd., a limited company registered under The Indian Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered office Laxmi Feed, Behind Tanna House, Nathalal Parekh Marg, Mumbai 400 039 ... Petitioner
Versus 1. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi 110 001 2. The Customs, Excise Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, (CEGAT) through its Registrar, 3rd Floor, PNB House, Sir P.M. Road,
2
Fort, Mumbai 400 001.
- The Commissioner of Central Excise,
Mumbai-V, Utpad Shulk Bhavan, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai 400 051.
- The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Kandivli Division, Takshashila Building, Samakt Estatem, Goregaon (East), Mumbai 400 067. ... Respondent
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction by passing an order on a basis different from the show cause notice.
Whether the restriction on MODVAT credit in Notification No. 217/86-CE applies to input goods under heading 39.20 used for manufacturing goods under heading 59.03.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M/s. Bhor Industries Ltd.
- respondent
Union of India
- respondent
The Customs, Excise Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal
- respondent
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-V
- respondent
The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Kandivli
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court