Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

M/S Bajaj Food Products Pvt Ltd Etc Etc vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Rohtak on 18 May, 2015

Bench: A.K. Sikri, Uday Umesh Lalit

     ITEM NO.38                               COURT NO.2                 SECTION III

                                 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F         I N D I A
                                         RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Civil Appeal Diary No(s).                  14926/2015

     M/S BAJAJ FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD ETC ETC                                 Appellant(s)

                                                     VERSUS

     COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, ROHTAK                                  Respondent(s)

     (with appln. (s) for condonation of delay in filing appeal)

     Date : 18/05/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI
                           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
                                                (Vacation Bench)

     For Appellant(s)                   Mr. Pankaj Bhatia,Adv.
                                        Mr. Vivek Chaudhary,Adv.
                                        Ms. Bharti Tyagi,Adv.
     For Respondent(s)

                            UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                               O R D E R

Learned counsel for the appellants is permitted to file additional affidavit.

Learned counsel for the appellants has brought to our notice order dated 30.4.2007 passed by the office of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Delhi-III in C.No.Appl/CE/RTK/99/06. By the said order the Commissioner held that the goods in question were correctly valued by the appellants herein in accordance with Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. He further submits that no appeal was preferred by the Department against this order.

The submission, thus, is that when the Department has itself accepted that the goods in question are to be Signature Not Verified valued on the basis of Section 4 A of the Central Excise Digitally signed by Suman Wadhwa Date: 2015.05.19 10:47:04 IST Act, 1944, the impugned order holding otherwise is Reason: erroneous.

Delay condoned.

Appeal is admitted.

-2-

Issue notice on the application for grant of ex parte ad interim stay.

In the meantime, there shall be stay of the impugned demand till the next date of hearing.

   (SUMAN WADHWA)                       (SUMAN JAIN)
     AR-cum-PS                          COURT MASTER