A short order dismissing a central excise appeal. The court held that substantial questions of law would not survive based on a Supreme Court pronouncement in Appeal No. 3947 of 2013. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CEXA.248.2014.35.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 248 OF 2014
The Commissioner, } Central Excise and Service Tax } Appellant versus Chhatrapati Shahu Rayat } Sakhar Udyog } Respondent
Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly with Mr. Jitendra B. Mishra for the Appellant.
None for the Respondent.
CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & G. S. PATEL, JJ.
DATED :- JANUARY 4, 2016
P.C. :-
After this Appeal was called out, Mr. Jetly and Mr.Mishra both concede that in view of the pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Appeal No. 3947 of 2013, the substantial questions of law would not survive. The same stand answered against the Revenue and in favour of the Respondent/Assessee. The Appeal is therefore dismissed. There would be no order as to costs.
(G.S.PATEL, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Page 1 of 1
J.V.Salunke,PA
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Appeal No. 3947 of 2013Referred¶10
The Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax
Chhatrapati Shahu Rayat Sakhar Udyog
S. C. Dharmadikari
G. S. Patel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
