GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (4) TMI 278 - PATNA HIGH COURT

2016 (4) TMI 278 - PATNA HIGH COURT - 2016 (335) E.L.T. 392 (Pat.) - Availment of benefit under Notification No.01/2011-CE, dated 1.3.2011 - Appeal dismissed on the ground that the review petition is pending and the matter is sub judice and it would be premature to decide the appeals without a final decision on the issues raised in the Supreme Court - Held that:- the impugned order, dated 23.11.2015, which the respondent No.3 has passed, is wholly misconceived inasmuch as mere fact of filing of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

titioner : Mr. Tanmoy Chakravarty, Adv. Mr. Brisketu Sharan Pandey, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. S D Sanjay (Addl. SOC. GEN) Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, Sr. S.C., Customs JUDGMENT ( Per: Honourable Mr. Justice I. A. Ansari ) Aggrieved by the order, dated 23.11.2015, passed by respondent No.3, namely, Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Patna, in Appeal No.140/995/Pat/Cus/Appeal/2015, this writ petition has been filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking, in substance, issuance of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ot been allowing the petitioner to avail the benefit under Notification No.01/2011-CE, dated 1.3.2011, the writ petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of appropriate writ commanding the respondents, inter alia, to allow the petitioner to avail the benefit. The said writ petition gave rise to C.W.J.C. No.10601 of 2015, which was disposed of on 22.7.2015. The order, dated 22.7.2015, being explicit, is reproduced hereinbelow. Heard learned .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sel for the petitioner that the said issue has already been decided by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.9440 of 2003: M/s. SRF Ltd vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai by order dated 26.3.2015. It is also contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has represented before the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Raxaul on 22.5.2015 but the same has not yet been disposed of and the petitioner has been compelled to keep on paying CVD at the higher rate of 6 %, though under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al as also learned counsel for the Customs Department submit that the direction may be issued to the Assistant Commissioner to dispose of the representation of the petitioner. In the said circumstances, let a fresh representation be filed by the petitioner along with a copy of the earlier representation dated 22.5.2015 as also a copy of the order of the Supreme Court within a period of two weeks from today so that it may be disposed of expeditiously. The writ application is, accordingly, dispose .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

afresh the representation, to be filed by the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of the representation. The order, dated 22.7.2015, aforementioned, later on, was modified, at the instance of the respondents, by order, dated 14.9.2015, passed in M.J.C. No. 2136 of 2015. The order, dated 14.9.2015, modifying the earlier order, dated 22.7.2015, reads as follows:- Heard learned counsels for the parties. This application has been filed for modification of the order date .....

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 Department that no matter is pending before the Assistant Commissioner, Customs, Raxaul. Learned counsel for Opposite Party- Dabur India Limited submits that 674 appeals against the order of the Assistant Commissioner are pending before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). He further submits that a direction be given to the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), instead of the Assistant Commissioner, Customs, Raxaul to dispose of the appeals. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

been given by the order, dated 14.9.2015 aforementioned is that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Patna, shall, in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s SRF Ltd. -v-Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, passed in Civil Appeal No.9440 of 2003, dispose of the appeals, which the writ petitioners had filed, within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order, dated 14.9.2015. Respondent No.3, namely, Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Patna has, .....

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