Bombay High Court
Ina Bearings India Pvt. Ltd vs The Commissioner Of Central Excise Pune ... on 15 December, 2020
Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, Abhay Ahuja
34-ia-465-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.465 OF 2019
IN
CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.38 OF 2018
Schaeffler India Limited .. Applicant.
In the matter between
INA Bearings India Pvt. Ltd., .. Appellant.
v/s.
The Commissioner of Central Excise Pune-1 .. Respondent.
Mr. Prakash Shah with Mr. Prasad Paranjape and Mr. Jas Sanghavi i/b.
PDS Legal, for the Applicant/ Appellant.
Mr. Vijay Kantharia with Mr. Dhananjay Deshmukh, for the Respondent.
Smita Digitally signed
by Smita R. Joshi CORAM: UJJAL BHUYAN &
R. Joshi ABHAY AHUJA, JJ.
Date: 2020.12.18 11:34:01 +0530 DATE : 15th DECEMBER, 2020.
P.C:-
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2 This appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1994 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 has been preferred against the final order dated 16 th November, 2017 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Mumbai (Tribunal) in Appeal No. ST/85628 & 85629 of 2016.
3 Appeal was admitted by this Court on 25 th September, 2018 on the substantial questions of law formulated in the said order.
4 The appeal has been listed today on a praecipe filed by the applicant.
S.R.JOSHI 1 of 2
34-ia-465-2019
5 Mr. Shah, learned Counsel for the applicant submits that by
the final order dated 16th November, 2017, Tribunal had dismissed the appeal of the appellant; however the matter was remanded back to the respondent on the point of limitation and also for recording a finding on the issue of revenue neutrality and its impact on limitation and penalties. According to him, despite pendency of the appeal before this Court, respondent has fixed personal hearing following remand by the Tribunal on 21st December, 2020.
6 Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties and on due consideration, we feel that when the appeal challenging the order of the Tribunal is pending before this Court, it would not be proper on the part of the respondent to proceed with the personal hearing following remand made by the Tribunal which order itself is the subject matter of adjudication in appeal before this Court.
7 Accordingly, we direct that till disposal of the appeal, consequential steps following order dated 16 th November, 2017 passed by the Tribunal shall not be taken by the respondent.
8 That apart, we grant liberty to the applicant to prosecute the present appeal as the appellant.
9 Interim application is disposed of.
10 This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/ Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned to act on a digitally signed copy of this order.
(ABHAY AHUJA,J.) (UJJAL BHUYAN,J.) S.R.JOSHI 2 of 2