TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1863X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ely. Since, this Court has not adjudicated the exact liability of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff is permitted to approach the CESTAT by filing an appropriate application in Excise Appeal Nos. 1180/2010 and 1727/2010. In the said application, the Plaintiff shall ensure that DMRC, Tata Motors and the Commissioner Excise, Jaipur and Lucknow are also impleaded as parties - The interim relief granted on 10th January, 2019 shall continue for a period of four weeks from today i.e. till 25th May, 2019 subject to further orders passed by the CESTAT. The CESTAT, may also consider the prayer for interim relief sought by the Plaintiff in respect of coercive measures being taken by the Excise Department and impose such conditions as it deems appropriate i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f challenged the stand of the Excise Department and lost in its challenge till the Supreme Court. Thus, vide judgment dated 8 th August, 2017 the liability of the Plaintiff was confirmed against it, by the Supreme Court. 3. Subsequently, however, Tata Motors approached the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) and vide order dated 28th December, 2018, CESTAT has set aside the order of the Excise Commissioner and has held that Tata Motors is entitled to the exemption from payment of excise duty in respect of the chassis. 4. The total excise duty is to the tune of ₹ 1,60,09,717/- which includes the duty levied on the chassis component of the buses. With the CESTAT giving exemption to the Tata Motors, the tot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... On the said date, it was directed that no coercive steps shall be taken by the Excise Department against the Plaintiff. 9. Mr. Yashish, Advocate has entered appearance on behalf of Excise Department, Jaipur Branch which is the relevant Commissionerate. He submits that the liability of the Plaintiff having been affirmed till the Supreme Court, no protection can be granted to the Plaintiff. A query was put by the Court to the Ld. Counsel if he disputes the passing of the order dated 28th December 2018 by the CESTAT in favour of Tata Motors Limited and if there is any challenge to the said order. Ld. Counsel submits that he has no instructions. 10. Mr. Amit Bansal, Advocate appearing pursuant to court notice submits that the CESTAT ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
