Commissioner Of Central Excise& ... vs Mzgaon Dock Ltd....Opponent(S) on 16 February, 2015

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Commissioner Of Central Excise& ... vs Mzgaon Dock Ltd....Opponent(S) on 16 February, 2015

Bench: Vijay Manohar Sahai

         O/TAXAP/650/2009                                 JUDGMENT




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                            TAX APPEAL NO. 650 of 2009



FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:



HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY MANOHAR
SAHAI


and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA

================================================================

1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see
      the judgment ?

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the
      judgment ?

4     Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as
      to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order
      made thereunder ?

================================================================
    COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE& CUSTOMES, VADODARA -
                        II....Appellant(s)
                              Versus
                MZGAON DOCK LTD....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR GAURANG H BHATT, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR BL NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1
================================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.
                 VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI
                 and


                                     Page 1 of 3
         O/TAXAP/650/2009                                           JUDGMENT



                     HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA

                                  Date : 16/02/2015


                                  ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI)

1. We have heard Mr.Gaurang H.Bhatt, learned counsel for the appellant.

2. While admitting this appeal on 30.07.2009, the Court had formulated the following substantial question of law:

"Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified and has committed a substantial error of law in holding that the demands raised beyond the normal period of limitation of six months are to be barred on the ground of the Department's knowledge subsequent to the alleged suppression/mis-declaration by the assessee?"

3. In this Tax Appeal, the adjudicating authority imposed penalty of Rs.20,000/-. The assessee filed the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals)which came to be rejected. The assessee filed the appeal before the CESTAT and the Tribunal has disposed of the said appeal setting aside the penalty imposed upon the assessee. The said order of the Tribunal is challenged in this tax appeal.

Page 2 of 3

O/TAXAP/650/2009 JUDGMENT

4. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS V. STOVEC INDUSTRIES LTD., reported in 2014(33) STR 124 (Guj) held that in view of instruction dated 17.8.2011, tax appeal below Rs.10 lakh is not maintainable and this instruction also applies to the pending appeal. Following the aforesaid decision of the Division Bench, we dismiss this tax appeal as not maintainable. Accordingly, the question of law posed in this appeal is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.

(V.M.SAHAI, ACJ.) (R.P.DHOLARIA,J.) pathan Page 3 of 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court