Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Central Excise vs M/S.Sree Narasimha Textiles Ltd on 25 July, 2016
Bench: S.Manikumar, D.Krishnakumar
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated: 25.07.2016 C O R A M The Honourable Mr.Justice S.Manikumar and The Honourable Mr.Justice D.Krishnakumar Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3469 of 2009 The Commissioner of Central Excise Customs and Central Excise Commissionarate, 6/7, A.T.D. Street, Race Course Road, Coimbatore - 641 018. ... Appellant ..Vs.. 1. M/s.Sree Narasimha Textiles Ltd., Kannampalayam Village, Coimbatore - 641 402. 2. Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zone Bench, Shastri Bhavan Annexe, Chennai. ... Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the Final Order No.137 of 2009 dated 01.04.2009 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench. For appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel for Central Excise for Mr.A.P.Srinivas J U D G M E N T
(Judgment of the Court was made by S.Manikumar,J) This Appeal has been filed against the Final Order No.137 of 2009 dated 01.04.2009 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench.
2. The substantial question of law raised in the instant appeal is:-
"a. Whether or not the CESTAT is correct in exercising its jurisdiction over a case falling under Proviso (a) to Sec.35(B)(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944?
b. Whether or not the Final Order No.1088/2008 dt. 25.9.2008 of the CESTAT is sustainable when it had been passed five years subsequent to the order passed by the Govt. of India in its Revisional Jurisdiction in terms of Sec.35 EE of the Act, 1944 and which had attained finality?;
c. Whether or not the Impugned Order No.137/2009 dated 01.04.2009 of the CESTAT is sustainable in so far as the CESTAT failed to exercise its power under Section 35(C)(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944".
3. Today, the instant Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is listed under the caption 'for withdrawal'.
4. We have gone through the material on record. That apart, Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue submitted that the duty element is Rs.1,76,866/-, which is very much within the ceiling limit prescribed in Circular No.I/10/10/2016 Legal, dated 21/3/2016 and on that basis, appellant department has instructed him to withdraw the appeal.
5. Placing on record the above submission, while dismissing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3469 of 2009, as withdrawn, substantial questions of law raised, are left open. No costs.
(S.M.K.,J) (D.K.K.,J)
25.07.2016
ars
Index: yes/No
website: Yes/No.
S.MANIKUMAR,J
a n d
D.KRISHNAKUMAR,J
ars
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3469 of 2009
25.07.2016