Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2018 (3) TMI 571

Service Tax Versus M/s Raja Dyeing, Ludhiana [2017 (3) TMI 1284 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT], held that so long as the question of valuation or classification arises the appeal would not be maintainable before the High Court even if other issues are raised in view of section 35G(1) of the Central Excise Act. - The provisions of section 35G(1) of the Central Excise Act are in pari materia to section 130(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The judgment, therefore, applies to the present case as well. - Appeal is dismissed only on the ground that it is not maintainable. - CUSAP No.6 of 2017 (O&M) - Dated:- 22-2-2018 - MR. S. J. VAZIFDAR, CJ. AND MR. AVNEESH JHINGAN, J. For The Appellant : Mr. Sourabh Goel, Sr. Standing Counsel, UOI For The .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

urpose of deciding the issues relating to the findings in paragraph 4.2 (iii) (iv) (v)(a) and paragraph 4.5 of the order dated 22.02.2016 of the adjudicating authority and the paragraphs relating thereto. In view of the fact that the goods have been in the custody of the appellant for about four years, we would request the Tribunal to decide this issue preferably by 31.03.2017. 3. The parties shall in the first instance appear before the Tribunal on 13.02.2017 and thereafter as directed by the Tribunal. We express no views or opinion in respect of the order dated 22.02.2016 in so far as it relates to valuation and classification. 4. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. 4. We have set out the order only because it was relied upon by the pa .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

from every order passed in appeal by the Appellate Tribunal on or after the 1st day of July, 2003 (not being an order relating, among other things, to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for the purposes of assessment), if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law. 7. The Division Bench held that so long as the question of valuation or classification arises the appeal would not be maintainable before the High Court even if other issues are raised in view of section 35G(1) of the Central Excise Act. The Division Bench held:- 11. The words among other things in Section 35 G are of singular importance in determining the ambit of Secti .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

eme Court and the other party that intends challenging the other type of issue would have to file an appeal before the High Court. There could potentially be four appeals against the same order of the Tribunal- two in the High Court and two in the Supreme Court. It was precisely to avoid these situations that Section 32 G was enacted. It was to avoid the bifurcation of proceedings before the Supreme Court and the High Court. 13. This would also avoid conflicting findings. A view to the contrary would lead to the possibility of an appeal against the order of the Tribunal being maintainable in certain respects before the High Court and in other respects before the Supreme Court. This could lead to considerable confusion and complication. For .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

e of the goods for the purposes of assessment. Such an appeal would, absent any other questions, lie to the High Court. Once it is held that an appeal against the order of the Tribunal which deals with questions that fall within the ambit of Section 35 L as well as other questions lies to the Supreme Court under Section 35 L the mere fact that the party chooses to challenge only that part of the order that falls within the ambit of Section 32 G would make no difference. In other words, it cannot be said that the party that chooses to challenge the order of the Tribunal only so far as it relates to the determination of questions falling within the ambit of 35 G must file the appeal before the High Court even though the order also deals with .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||