Karnataka High Court
Commissioner Of Customs vs M/S Mphasis Ltd on 22 September, 2011
Bench: N.Kumar, Ravi Malimath
EN THE HIGH CGURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 22"" DAY OF SEPTEMBER .2{33;'i "'~«_ "'._
PRESENT
THE H{)N'Bi_E MR. JUSTICE N.KUM_f¢§F!;~--.:. %
AND , ;
THE HC)N'BLE MR.JUSTICE:=.RAV-IAMAQMATH4" f-.___ 7 CSTA.NO.S OF BETWE?__EN_:-
C0mmis$AE0nézr of"€u"sto::fi':':;~-- J PB.i\£o_.S4OQ","~. " ~ CR Bgliidéfigf 'V V .,Q§.:-=<.-5:€"E~":9:,.R®a.£i,, _____ .. s Ba:3ga§Q';*e :{E§.§G {E11, .=.A¥>PELLAE\§T %";:a;=g;?'_;.-:29; "rr§si';'§;;8%%':;ag':<ar, Advaaaiefi V _ AN'€;«;
. "s»%;;::=§«sp§:-ghgég mt '=f>;ja§§a§_.ifijaifvighagég $352. iiékg} §:%§';4§,?3, Ga§§§§<:*§s§'z:':a £QE"flfi§€X!A- Residency Read, Bangalore ~ 560 025. ,..RESPONDEi\ET >=32>i<* This CSTA filed under section 130(1) of the Act, 1962 arising out of Appeal i\i0.182--183/20.éQ7--paSse'd in Final Order Ne.924 & 925/2007 dated _.Q9/G8,/f.ZO{3-3"' _ praying to formulate the substantial questien Eaw..stated"i therein, set aside the order passedby the"CES.TAT;..S--Qut.h "V Zone Bench; Bangaiore, in Finai C«'a*dei*"i\.1a;_>.'§32é.§-« &"E32.S/ZVOG}? dated 09/08/2007 arising in Appeai Ne";1.824183/2F){3?f';s.___ This CSTA coming V. i'i--ee:"%nfi_: sdayl r\£.§<UMAR J., delivered the folletréii-ng:-r_» The Reven_VL,i'_'e hes er.eferArAed'.j_'-thisijanpeai chaiienging the e%der__ ,r,>aAss'{'%:.{€«~..i;3:'\,*itiie_T"i7r;b-enai which has held that there is no 3iusi:if4ieati'e'n ef duty as the appeiiants had deeidrédeed tVhe.seiVd geede and paid the apereeriate duty tif1ie;fe_§b1'x;«'«--._Vset aeide the impugned order eheiienged in '.'--~.\.
.2; flee eeeessee ie eieirnieg exeesetiee {rem 'i..ig:5ia;s1me;:t ef see; 'fee virtue e? e iaietifieeitiee eeggeexteez K §:
, E. eet«e%§v:,et:e:teeee ee €§§\§""i"Rs1L exezee vs, erg, Cus.dated 22?" October, 1991 and 1/1995 CE dated 4"' Eaeuary, 1995, But the Revenue had issued a st3c;wV_:'<:.;:i't;.sve notice inveking Notification N052/2093 Infect it is not a Notification underJy;;h_Ech t't'ae"a:{s'_e,S§;'ee'.wa_S; " 'V claiming the benefit. Therefore T:fE'b:;:neEt.,a»fte'i* a"'{i:a~re't"z,s_§: scrutiny of an the N0tEfiCat_ie.£jtS amt'the1gii'a.1;-t::.._.,g:£.¥theff essessee came to the concVi__t_t_t:é:i-3:1:~..t_hat 't%te ' aevt%essee is entitled to the benefit 'e.tV:"thAe'é-V_Nc§_ti%ie:meeA:ti'£539,140/19%: and 1/1995 and is nc3.tvEiab!e'te.tgeyy'-atty "tJ.'£:;'tV3':/itivleaccordirsgty set aside the jj'-Va,'ti.tut1:ti':';étEes. It is against th e sa id He ]*{:t'%Vé'e__p E I ed .
'V _- Mappeai Etweives the Emterprn ef'ta;tE'eti twe Notiféeetiens which Es be\,ze:s.c%_ti1e"'ett'-atfxaepeat under Seetéen 13G~»(1) ef Egg. A:{Ct§t"s$'te:'t:;§e_ .A.e'tA.V" tttt 'the gate eeeetéen hag :9 be éecédee éV_v£Ei'_:{i§v;@>§'L::5S«§vCtv§V§}t"f7§i.:~~}3Q"E ef the Ctzsteeze Act by tee /fieex Cee;_tt, _.§e_i%;-eée es' the Eeegreent ef this C§%_:'E"3: tr: tee ease et :
E:
3%.
-,/ MANGALORE REFINEREES AND PE"?RQ CHEMICALS LIMETED, CEA No.5/200? 9.9. :£=~9~ZO18, this apg4eaVE:"i$ m_:0t maéntainabie, Accordingty it is rejected reser$z.f-:55i§'i§«é§**t3}' . the Revenue to approach the Apex; Ceogxrt, 3* . '¥"?'.*9'<7"T*;f"'?
$23;
W ' -
*2? ii