High CourtsDivision Bench(2009) 06 CAL CK 0023

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Asha Ispat Pvt. Ltd.

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 10 June 2009 · Citation: (2010) 258 ELT 338

HON’BLE JUDGES
Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J · Sankar Prasad Mitra, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
G.A. No. 874 of 2009 and CEXA No. 24 of 2009

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 393 words
1.

This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated October 13, 2008 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata in Appeal No. EDM-336/05.

2.

Asha Ispat Private Limited, Respondent in this appeal, applied for abatement of duty under the Compounded Levy Scheme on the allegation that their company was closed for more than 7 days. Admittedly, the request for abatement is pending adjudication before the Commissioner.

3.

Curiously, although the request for abatement is pending before the Commissioner, the department raised demand for the very period for which a request for abatement is pending.

4.

Asha Ispat Private Limited took the matter to the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority, in our view, rightly set aside the demand, but it was made clear that the order of the Appellate Authority was without prejudice to the rights of the department for taking suitable action after a decision by the Commissioner on the matter of abatement.

5.

The department preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, also, dismissed the appeal by the department.

6.

We are of the opinion that the Appellate Authority as also the Tribunal took reasonable view in the matter. When the request for abatement is pending, the department ought not to have raised a demand for the self-same period without disposing of the application for abatement.

7.

We do not think that the appeal involves any question of law far less any substantial question of law requiring interference by this Court.

8.

The appeal is, therefore, summarily dismissed.

9.

However, we direct the Commissioner to dispose of the application for abatement filed by M/s. Asha Ispat Pvt. Ltd. within a month from the date of communication of this order to him after, however, giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned in the matter.

10.

By way of abundant caution, we make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of the claim and the counter-claim of the parties concerning the request for abatement and all points are left open to be decided by the Commissioner in accordance with law.

11.

In view of the dismissal of the appeal, the connected application for stay, also, stands dismissed.

12.

We make no order as to costs.

13.

All parties are to act on a Xerox signed copy of this order on the usual undertakings.