Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 1183 - AT - Central ExciseWithout prejudice to the other submission made in the appeals, it is submitted that the applicant has not recovered and duty from the customers. Therefore, the sale price of the resultant materials should be treated as cum duty price - Explanation to Section 4 of the Central Excise Act - Circular DOF No. 384/1/2003-TRU dated 28.2.2003 - Held that: - It is pertinent to note that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE vs. Dempo Engineering Works Ltd. [2015 (4) TMI 961 - SUPREME COURT], held that Tribunal was not agreeing with the order of the Commissioner, the order of the Tribunal should have been a speaking order dealing with the reasoning given by the Commissioner and stating as to why the said reasoning was faulty. - issue as to whether the product is marketable or not was not even raised by the respondent in reply to the show cause notice nor was it argued before the Commissioner and therefore on that ground the Tribunal could not have allowed the appeal. We find that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited above is applicable in the facts of the present case and in our considered opinion, the new ground which the applicant is seeking to raise cannot be raised at this stage as the ground is not purely legal in nature. Consequently, we do not find any merit in the applications moved by the applicant/appellant and we dismiss the same.
|