Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Healthware Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, The Commissioner of Customs (Airport)

2015 (12) TMI 1303 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Validity of Ex-parte decision of the tribunal to dismiss the appeal - CVD was paid utilizing DEPB Scrips - imported items were capital goods or not - Held that:- In a matter of this nature, where an ex parte decision has been rendered by the Tribunal, the prolongation of a decision on the same is not beneficial to either of the parties. After all, the appellant seeks an opportunity to appear before the Tribunal. It is not recorded in the order of the Tribunal that the appellant herein was habitu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

are of the considered view that one opportunity can be granted to the appellant, especially, in view of the fact that the benefit granted to the appellant by the Commissioner (Appeals) was confined only to one of the scrips, that was issued prior to the public notice issued by the DGFT. - Impugned order is set aside - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. - CMA No. 2169 of 2015, MP No. 1 of 2015 - Dated:- 15-10-2015 - V. Ramasubramanian And T. Mathivanan, JJ. For the Appellant : .....

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 were classified by the Department under tariff heading 9018.19. Two DEPB Scrips dated 31.8.1999 and 26.4.2000 were produced in accordance with the Customs Notification No.34/97. Further, the Director General of Foreign Trade issued a public notice on 7.4.2000, amending para 7.36B of the procedure to the effect that credit under DEPB may be utilised for payment of customs duty and on any item which is freely importable, except capital goods. Therefore, a demand notice for duty was raised upon t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

see is entitled to the benefit of DEPB scrips dated 31.8.1999. The appeal was filed way back in the year 2004. On 25.9.2014, the appeal was allowed ex parte on the ground that the assessee neither appeared nor filed an application for adjournment. Aggrieved by the ex parte decision so rendered by the CESTAT, the assessee is before us. 5. In the grounds of appeal, the appellant has indicated the sequence of events atleast from February 2010 upto the date of the decision. The tabular statement fil .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

25.04.2012 No Bench Sitting 10. 19.07.2012 31.05.2012 No Bench Sitting 11. 03.09.2013 Adjournment sought by sending letter dated 13.08.13 12. 14.10.2013 24.12.2013 No Bench Sitting 13. No intimation 25.09.2014 Final order passed. 6. Mr.Haja Mohideen Gishti, learned Standing Counsel for the Department produced a copy of the mail received from the Department asking him to seek time for filing counter/further instructions from the Section concerned. But, we are of the considered view that in a mat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version