Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (11) TMI 1228 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

2015 (11) TMI 1228 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT - 2016 (331) E.L.T. 363 (Bom.) - Waiver of pre deposit - Classification of coal - Bituminous Coal or Steam Coal - Held that:- Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal took a particular view and later on Chennai Bench disagreed with it. The referral order of Chennai Bench is also extensively referred in the memo of appeal before us and a copy of the same is annexed at Pages 278 to 294 of the paper book. The issue involved is classification of coal imported by Appella .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s to resolve the matter, then all the more, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy, so also on the point whether mere reference to larger Bench should necessarily result in total waiver and unconditional stay, we are of the view that interest of justice will be served if each of these appeals are allowed. The impugned orders of the Tribunal are quashed and set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - Customs Appeal No. 43 of 2015, Customs Appeal No. 48 of 2015, Customs A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Tribunal's West Zonal Bench ('Tribunal'). The Appellants before us are aggrieved by the order of Tribunal directing the Appellants to pay substantial amounts running into crores of rupees as precondition for the stay and suspension of recovery proceedings. In other words, waiver of the condition of pre-deposit on such terms has been questioned by the Appellants. 2. Mr. Shroff and Mr.Sridharan, learned Senior Advocates appearing for the Appellants would urge that the Appellants have .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dvocates that the larger Bench of the Tribunal has indeed been constituted and it has commenced the hearing of the case referred to it. 4. On the other hand, Mr.Jetly for the revenue, supports the impugned order of the Tribunal. He submits that the Appellants have dragged on the matter inasmuch as in one of the cases, stay order is passed in the month of December 2014 and to be precise on 14 December 2014 but till November 2015, no request to set aside the same was made. Therefore, the condition .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

so also the reference order dated 18 November 2014 and requesting it that there is need to modify the stay order initially passed on this subsequent development. 6. However, what we have seen from both the orders is that Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal took a particular view and later on Chennai Bench disagreed with it. The referral order of Chennai Bench is also extensively referred in the memo of appeal before us and a copy of the same is annexed at Pages 278 to 294 of the paper book. The iss .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version