This order dismissed an appeal for being not maintainable due to the amount involved falling below the prescribed monetary limit. The legal issues were left open rather than being decided on merits.
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.
CEA No.22 of 2018 (O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CEA No.22 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision.23.08.2018
Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax Commissionerate, Chandigarh-I
...Appellant
Vs
M/s Grewal Enterprises ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
Present: Mr. Sourabh Goel , Advocate for the appellant.
-.-
RAJESH BINDAL J.
The appellant in the present appeal has challenged the order dated 21.03.2017 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh arising out of Appeal No.E/1962/2010, raising the following substantial questions of law:-
“(i) Whether the CESTAT is correct in allowing the benefit of CENVAT Credit of the duty paid on inputs when it is technically and physically impossible to use the GP Sheets in the manufacture of finished goods i.e. motor vehicle/tractor parts and there is no evidence to the contrary adduced by
PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.08.27 13:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CEA No.22 of 2018 (O&M)
-2-
the respondent?
(ii) Whether the judgment of the CESTAT is contrary to the provisions of MODVAT scheme when the scheme itself has been devised to allow CENVAT credit of duty on inputs in that condition only where the inputs have been used in the manufacture of finished goods?
At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the amount involved in the present appeal is ` 45,32,842/-. As the amount involved is less than the limit prescribed in the Circular issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (Judicial Cell) dated 11.07.2018, the present appeal be dismissed as not maintainable.
Ordered accordingly.
However, it is made clear that dismissal of present appeal
will not be taken as upholding the order passed by the Tribunal as the
PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.08.27 13:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CEA No.22 of 2018 (O&M)
-3-
legal issue raised therein is left open to be considered in an appropriate case.
(RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE
(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE August 23, 2018 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No
PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.08.27 13:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax Commissionerate, Chandigarh-I
M/s Grewal Enterprises
Rajesh Bindal
Amit Rawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
