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 4, Cited by 1]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs Tvs Interconnect Systems Ltd on 6 March, 2014

        

 
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH
CHENNAI

Appeal No.ST/239/2010

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.12/2010 dt. 28.1.2010  passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Madurai] 

For approval and signature :

Honble Shri Pradip Kumar Das, Judicial Member


1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per  Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?						:

2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not ?				:

3. Whether the Member wishes to see the fair copy of the order ?							:

4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities ?						:


Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai		Appellant

         Versus

TVS Interconnect Systems Ltd.				Respondent

Appearance:

Ms. Indira Sisupal, AC (AR) For the Appellant Shri Sukanya, Advocate For the Respondent CORAM :
Honble Shri Pradip Kumar Das, Judicial Member Date of Hearing : 06-03-2014 Date of Decision : 06-03-2014 FINAL ORDER No.40201/2014
1. Revenue filed this appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) in so far as the Commissioner (Appeals) has no power to remand the case for de novo decision when the provisions contained in Section 35A (3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 as it existed prior to 11.5.2011 and empowering the Commissioner (Appeals) to refer cases back to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication or decision have been withdrawn w.e.f. 11.5.2011.
2. Ld. Authorized Representative on behalf of Revenue cited decisions as mentioned in the grounds of appeal.
3. On the other hand, Ld. advocate on behalf of the respondent relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE Pondicherry Vs Amaravathy Chemicals Ltd.  2010 (252) ELT 228 (Tri.-Chennai) and the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court's decision in the case of CCE Ahmedabad Vs Medico Labs  2004 (173) ELT 117 (Guj.).
4. After considering the submissions of both sides, I find that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Medico Labs (supra) dismissed the appeal filed by Revenue on the identical issue. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE Ahmedabad Vs Medico Labs (supra), I do not find any infirmity in the order of Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, the appeal filed by Revenue is rejected.

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) (PRADIP KUMAR DAS) JUDICIAL MEMBER gs 2