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

Rakesh Kumar Thakur Versus Commissioner of C. Ex., Chandigarh

2015 (10) TMI 2534 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Restoration of appeal - dismissed for non-prosecution - imposition of penalty - Department argued that the Order-in-Revision is only with regard to imposition of penalty, which was not a subject matter before the Commissioner (Appeals) and therefore .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ibid, it was clearly mentioned that “no order under Section 84 shall be passed by CCE in respect of any issue, an appeal against such issue is pending before the CCE (Appeals)”. It is seen that the appellant’s appeal was against Order-in-Original, da .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Appeals). As it is evident that the Order-in-Revision passed by the Commissioner was in violation of Section 84 ibid and therefore cannot be held to be sustainable. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned Order-in-Revision. - Decided in favour of appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : R.K. Singh, Member (T)]. - The Miscellaneous Application has been filed for restoration of appeal in the wake of CESTAT Final Order No. 50202/2015, dated 20-1-2015 in terms of which the appeal was dismissed summ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

application the appellant has pleaded that it had sent a request on 12-1-2015 to the CESTAT Registry stating that due to some personal difficulty, it would not be able to attend the hearing on 20-1-2015 at Chandigarh and that its (i.e., the appellan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lling Mills v. CCE, [2014 (310) E.L.T. 209 (S.C.) = 2014 (36) S.T.R. 1201 (S.C.)] holding that even in case of non-appearance of the appellant, the CESTAT should decide the appeal on merits, we recall the CESTAT order dated 20-1-2015 and with the con .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mary adjudication order was pending before the Commissioner (Appeals). It is seen that the appellant had earlier filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the same as the appellant did not comply with 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

er to Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the same on merits. It is thus obvious on 24-4-2009, when the impugned Order-in-Revision was passed, the matter was pending before Commissioner (Appeals). 4. Ld. Departmental Representative argued that 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

 

 

 

 

 

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