Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Pondicherry Versus Ravishankar Industries Pvt. Ltd., Pondicherry

2016 (3) TMI 265 - CESTAT CHENNAI

Lack of jurisdiction by the Assistant Commissioner - order set aside for want of jurisdiction. - Determination of duty and imposition of penalty - Held that:- In the present case is the issue is on valuation and re-determination of duty and imposition of penalty. Therefore the impugned order setting aside the original order on the jurisdiction is not justified. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and direct the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the issue on merits. See PAHWA CHEMICALS PV .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

DICIAL MEMBER For the Petitioner : Shri C. Ramkumar, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR) ORDER PER R.PERIASAMI Revenue filed an appeal against Commissioner (Appeals) order dt.1.7.2004. 2. The brief facts of the respondent manufactured excisable goods on job work basis and out of the raw material supplied by the principal manufacturer and discharging the excise duty on behalf of the principal manufacturer. 3. The Adjudicating Authority demanded differential duty and also .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing the duty on the correct value, they have paid duty as per the cost of raw materials and job charges. He reiterated the grounds of appeal and relied the Board Circular dt.27.2.97 and as per the Para 3 of Board Circular, the Assistant Commissioner is competent to decide the case on determination of value or classification. This case is not involving with fraud, collusion, any wilful mis-statement, suppression of facts or contravention of Central Excise Act/Rules. He relied the following citati .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssioner (Appeals) in his impugned order has passed impugned order without any discussion on merits and set aside the order only on the grounds of jurisdiction. 8. On perusal of the Order-in-Original dt.31.12.2001, we find that the respondent being a job worker, manufacturing the goods on the raw materials supplied by the principal manufacturer, instead of returning the goods, the appellants are discharging the Central Excise Duty on behalf of the principal supplier. While paying the excise duty .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

differential duty. 10. The respondent contention that the issue is covered under para 3A of Board Circular is not justified. On the identical issue the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Pahwa Chemicals Pvt Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi (supra) settled the issue and held that the order cannot be set aside for want of jurisdiction. The relevant paras of Honble Supreme Court order are reproduced as under :- "13. In order to consider the powers of the Board one needs to se .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o the Central Excise Officers and such Officers must follow such orders, instructions or directions of the Board. However, these directions can only be for the purpose of uniformity in the classification of excisable goods or with respect to levy of duties of excise on such goods. It is thus clear that the Board has no power to issue instructions or orders contrary to the provisions of the Act or in derogation of the provisions of the Act. The Board can only issue such direction as is necessary .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

types of works to certain Officers or classes of Officers. The Circulars relied upon are, therefore, nothing more than administrative directions allocating various types of works to various classes of Officers. These administrative directions cannot take away jurisdiction vested in a Central Excise Officer under the Act. At the highest all that can be said is Central Excise Officers, as a matter of propriety, must follow the directions and only deal with the work which has been allotted to them .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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