The High Court dismissed an appeal filed by M/s. Bharat Bijlee Ltd. as not maintainable. The court held that appeals regarding valuation of goods for assessment are barred under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, directing the appellant to approach the Supreme Court under Section 35L.
The appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.
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.
8-CEXA-263-2017.DOC
Jitendra Shankar Nijasure Digitally signedby JitendraShankar NijasureDate: 2018.10.1117:51:13 +0530
jsn
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 263 OF 2017
M/s. Bharat Bijlee Ltd. … Appellant
V/s.
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur … Respondent Commissionerate
Ms. Padmavati Patil, with Ms. Mansi Patil, for the Appellant. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly with Mr. Ram Ochani, for the Respondent.
CORAM: M.S.SANKLECHA & RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ. DATE: 10TH OCTOBER, 2018.
PC:-
1944 challenges an order dated 3rd May, 2017 passed the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal).
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law was the Tribunal justified in remanding the matter second time in second round of litigation to the Adjudicating Authority for submission of documents, in a case where, neither the Lower Authorities nor CESTAT in earlier round had an issue of requirement of any documents and, in any case, for deciding the issue the requisite documents were on record in appeal before CESTAT”?
1/2
8-CEXA-263-2017.DOC
issue to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh adjudication and should have disposed of the appeal finally.
( RIYAZ I. CHAGLA J. ) (M.S.SANKLECHA, J.)
1Central Excise Appeal No. 6 of 2018 dated 19th September, 2018.
2/2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act is maintainable regarding valuation of transformers for assessment purposes.
Whether the Tribunal was justified in remanding the matter second time to the Adjudicating Authority for submission of documents when documents were already on record.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Commissioner of CGST and C.Ex. Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra LtdExplained¶21
Commissioner of CGST and C.Ex. Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd
2 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s. Bharat Bijlee Ltd.
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur
M.S. Sanklecha
Riyaz I. Chagla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court