Gujarat High Court
Commissioner Of Central Excise vs M/S Omega ... on 23 January, 2015
Bench: Vijay Manohar Sahai, R.P.Dholaria
O/TAXAP/1732/2008 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX APPEAL NO. 1732 of 2008
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, 1950 or any
order made thereunder ?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
================================================================
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE....Appellant(s)
Versus
M/S OMEGA PHARMACEUTICALS....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR YN RAVANI, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.
VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA
Page 1 of 3
O/TAXAP/1732/2008 JUDGMENT
Date : 23/01/2015
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI)
1. We have heard Mr.Y.N.Ravani, learned advocate for the appellant. Though rule has been served on the respondent, no one appears on behalf of the respondent.
2. While admitting this appeal on 29.06.2009, the Court had formulated the following substantial question of law:
"Whether the respondent was not required to reverse the Cenvat Credit availed of central excise duty paid on inputs and contained in the finished goods, which are unfit for human consumption and not marketable for which remission of duty was applied ?"
3. Vide his impugned order, the Commissioner confirmed the amount of Rs.32,664/- by denying the benefit of modvat caredit in respect of inputs contained in finished products on which the remission of duty was allowed. In this Tax Appeal the CESTAT by its judgment dated 15.5.2008 has allowed the appeal of the department and set aside the duty of Rs.32,664/-. The order of the CESTAT is challenged by the department in this tax appeal. The said duty involved in this appeal is much below Rs. 10 lakhs.
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.
Page 2 of 3 O/TAXAP/1732/2008 JUDGMENT
(V.M.SAHAI, ACJ.)
(R.P.DHOLARIA,J.)
Ashish Tripathi
Page 3 of 3