TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 558X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt has dismissed the special leave to appeal by an order dated 17.10.2016. Therefore, taking into account the aforesaid judgment, the circular dated 22.08.2019, read with circular dated 17.08.2011, as the case does not fall under the exceptional case i.e., Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Appeal dismissed. - C.E.A. NO.36 OF 2019 C/W C.E.A. NO.65 OF 2018 - - - Dated:- 19-3-2021 - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY APPELLANT (BY SRI VIKRAM ADITYA HUILGOL, ADVOCATE) RESPONDENT (BY SRI ANIL KUMAR B., ADVOCATE), SRI R. DAKSHINA MURTY, SMT.M.MAHALAKSHI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI KS.NAVEEN KUMAR, ADVOCATE) JUDGMENT SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA. J., Regard being had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contention is that the appeal be dismissed accordingly. 5. On the other hand, Sri Vikram Aditya Huilgol, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has argued before this Court that the judgment delivered by the Tribunal is based upon a judgment delivered by the High Court of Gujarat in the case of INDSUR GLOBAL LTD. VS. UNION OF INDIA reported in (2014) 310 ELT 833 , wherein, it has held that the payment of excise duty by utilizing the CENVAT credit is not violation of the Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. It is further stated that the aforesaid judgment has been stayed by the Hon ble Supreme Court and stay is continuing. Therefore, the matter deserves to be remanded to the Tribunal or may be deferred. 6. This Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue appears to be that the Tribunal had given benefit to the assessee on the basis of invalidation of Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. However, this is entirely a different matter and the case, therefore, would not fall under the such exception. 2. In the result, delay condonation application and the review petition both are dismissed. The petition preferred by the Department was dismissed in the light of the monetary limit fixed by the circular under reference in the aforesaid case. Against the judgment of the Division Bench, a special leave to appeal was preferred before the Hon ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.CC 19015 - 19016 of 2016 , and the Hon ble Supreme Court has dismissed the special l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
