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

2016 (10) TMI 121 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

2016 (10) TMI 121 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT - 2016 (342) E.L.T. 497 (Bom.) - Maintainability - appeal before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), namely, the first appellate authority - directing assessee for executing bond for full value and reducing the bank guarantee to be furnished in the sum of ₹ 12,08,625/- for provisional release of seized goods - Held that:- during the pendency of this appeal, our attention, in all fairness, has been invited to a Larger Bench judgment and order .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y was maintainable. - Appeal disposed of - Central Excise Appeal No. 58 of 2015 - Dated:- 26-9-2016 - S. C. Dharmadhikari And B. P. Colabawalla, JJ. Mr. M. Dwivedi i/b. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly for the appellant Mr. Prakash Shah with Mr. Jas Sanghavi i/b. M/s. PDS Legal for the respondent ORDER P. C. This appeal by the Revenue challenges the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, dated 24th June, 2014 holding that the appeal preferred by the assessee before the Commi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ned in a letter dated 10th April, 2014. He granted the request for provisional release of the seized goods by directing the assessee to execute a bond in the sum of ₹ 3,49,79,234/- backed by a bank guarantee of 25% of the value as ascertained by the Additional Commissioner (Preventive), Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Daman Commissionerate. The bank guarantee was to be of nationalised bank. Naturally, the assessee, aggrieved by such a direction, approached the first appellate auth .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e. Firstly that the Commissioner (Appeals), the first appellate authority has, at the stage of provisional release of goods, virtually decided the entire matter. By passing a detailed order in favour of the assessee, now nothing survives at a regular adjudication. The second argument and with which we are concerned is that the provisional release order is not appealable. The tribunal's order in the case of Akanksha Syntex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai 2013 (289) ELT 18 .....

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