Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 1294 - CESTAT BANGALOREMaintainability of appeal - Jurisdiction - process amounting to manufacture or not? - cutting, grooving of the Aluminium sheet to make Aluminium composite panels amounts to manufacture of a distinct product commercially known as different. (ACP) - running sheets of ACPs are cut into smaller Sizes either of rectangular or square plates - with or without grooving. Held that: - the Hon'ble High Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., BANGALORE-I VERSUS PUSHPADEEP ENTERPRISES [2010 (4) TMI 842 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT], has allowed the appeal of the Revenue and held that cutting, grooving of the Aluminium sheet to make Aluminium composite panels amounts to manufacture of a distinct product commercially known as different. order of the Tribunal is set aside and the orders of the Addl. Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) is restored by answering the substantial question of law in favor of the revenue and against the assessee. Further, the decision of the Karnataka High Court has been challenged by the appellant and the appeal is also pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court but stay has been rejected. Therefore in the absence of any stay in favour of the appellant, the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka which is the jurisdictional High Court is binding on us - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|