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 Next →

Mrs. Padma Raghavan Sri Vigneswara Textile Printers Versus Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Commissioner of Central Excise And Customs (Appeals)

2017 (11) TMI 479 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Refund claim - unjust enrichment - Held that: - The first respondent considered the application for refund and passed an order dated 21.01.1999, ordering refund, but directing payment of amount to the Consumer Welfare Fund - Once again, the petitioner filed appeal before the Commissioner, who by order dated 21.06.2001, allowed the appeal, holding that since this was duty paid on demand, there was no question of the petitioner passing on the duty burden to any consumer, and therefore, the petitio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oor Division, Mettupalayam, has failed to follow the order passed by the Appellate Authority in Appeal No.133 of 2001, dated 21.06.2001. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union India vs. Kamlakshi Finanace Corporation Ltd., reported in (1991) 55 E.L.T. 433 (S.C.) pointed out as to what is judicial discipline while giving effect to orders of higher appellate authorities, which are binding on the lower appellate authorities. In Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. (supra), the case was somewh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

order unless operation there of has been suspended by a competent Court and mere fact of appeal having been filed against the order is no ground for not following it. At this stage, it would be beneficial to refer to the operative portion of the said judgment. 6........The High Court has, in our view, rightly criticised this conduct of the Assistant Collectors and the harassment to the assessee caused by the failure of these officers to give effect to the orders of authorities higher to them in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

inciples of judicial discipline require that the orders of the higher appellate authorities should be followed unreservedly by the subordinate authorities. The mere fact that the order of the appellate authority is not "acceptable" to the department-in itself an objectionable phrase-and is the subject matter of an appeal can furnished no ground for not following it unless its operation has been suspended by a competent Court. If this healthy rule is not followed, the result will only b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tral Excise with the legality or propriety of which it is not satisfied, it can direct the Collector to apply to the Appellate Tribunal for the determination of such points arising out of the decision or order as may be specified by the Board in its order. Under sub-section (2) the Collector of Central Excise, when he comes across any order passed by an authority subordinate to him, if not satisfied with its legality or propriety, may direct such authority to apply to the Collector (Appeals) for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r the Appellate Tribunal as the case may be. In the light of these amended provisions, there can be not justification for any Assistant Collector or Collector refusing to follow the order of the Appellate Collector or the Appellate Tribunal, as the case may be, even where he may have some reservations on its correctness. He has to follow the order of the higher appellate authority. This may instantly cause some prejudice to the Revenue but the remedy is also in the hands of the same officer. He .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssistant Commissioner in his overzealous attempt to get over the order passed by the appellate authority. The issue arose in the following manner: 4. The petitioner was engaged in the business of textile printing and processing of fabrics. The petitioner paid a duty of ₹ 48,767/- on 30.09.1996. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner on enquiry held that the duty levied was incorrect and passed an order dated 22.10.1997. Aggrieved by such order, the petitioner preferred appeal to the Commissio .....

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