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

2016 (3) TMI 803 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2016 (3) TMI 803 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Rectification of mistake - Tribunal while passing the order had not considered the earlier decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gautam Weaving Mills vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur (2008 (1) TMI 771 - CESTAT, MUMBAI ) as is squarely applicable in the present case - Held that:- find that the Tribunal had given a finding that M/s. Gautam Weaving Mills (supra), even the period after 2004, in that case the appellants were engaged in the manu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

it. Hence, the extended period of limitation would be involved.

In any event, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the Tribunal has no power to review its own order and it should not be done, while there is a long drawn process. Hence, do not find any merit in the application filed by the applicant. Rom application is rejected. - Application No : E/ROM/10003/2016 In Appeal No: E/1450/2011 - Order No. M/10048/2016 - Dated:- 1-2-2016 - MR. P.K. DAS, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Petitioner : .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ai). He submits that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gautam Weaving Mills (supra) is squarely applicable in the present case. He further submits that the Tribunal had taken into consideration that the decision of the Gautam Weaving Mills (supra) is after 2004. He further submits at para 7 of the Tribunal order, it was observed that the extended period of limitation would be invoked. He submits that the Tribunal had not considered that there is no requirement to submit endorsed invoic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

relied upon the various decisions. In the case of Vimal Enterprises (Supra) the period of dispute is July 1994 to August 1994. In the case of Darshan Industries the period of dispute appears to be 1994. In the case of Gautam Weaving Mills (supra), even the period is after 2004, in that case the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of grey fabrics and not the job worker. In the case of Proctor and Gamble (supra), the Tribunal observed that the invoices were issued in the name M/s Standard .....

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