Court: CESTAT Chandigarh Date of Order: 2019-03-14
On the other hand, Ld. AR opposed the contention of the ld. Counsel and submits that non consideration of the submissions made by the appellant cannot be the ground for rectification of mistake as erred by this Tribunal in the case of M/s S.H.S Electronics Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore reported in 2017 (350) E.L.T. 298 (Tri. – Chennai).
Court: CESTAT Hyderabad Date of Order: 2019-03-13
The above two errors are apparent on the records and accordingly they are rectified. Revenue is seeking another error for rectification is that the Commissioner should not have delegated the power of adjudication tolower authorities and this point was not considered by the Bench. On perusal of records we find that in the grounds of appeal, Revenue has not contested as to how the CENVAT Credit which has been allowed is incorrect and on a similar issue against the same Order-in-Original which went against the appellant assessee, this Bench has taken a view that CENVAT Credit is allowable by final order No. A/31219/2016, dated 22.11.2016 which is recorded in para No. 5. We do not find any error apparent on the face of this order as urged by learned Departmental Representative.
Court: CESTAT Allahabad Date of Order: 2019-03-11
On going through the said applications and after hearing the learned A.R. for the Revenue, I find that the Tribunal vide Final Order No.70886-70887/2017 dated 04.09.2017 disposed of two appeals filed by the assessee granting interest on the refund claims. The appellants in their Miscellaneous Applications has held that as the facts of only one case was discussed, Revenue is not implementing the said order for grant of refund in both the appeals. Accordingly they have sought for clarifications.
Court: CESTAT Bangalore Date of Order: 2019-03-08
In the absence of any logic for calculation of additional duties, there is no justification for sustaining this impugned order. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeals.
Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-03-08
The present appeal is filed against the Order-in-Appeal No CC-A-CUS-D-II-ICD-TKD-IMPORT-2444-2018 dated 25/10/2018 (for short impugned order) passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeal) , New Customs House, New Delhi, vide which he has upheld the order of the provisional release passed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs, (Import, ICD, TKD) dated 20/06/2018. Being aggrieved with the impugned order the appellant is before this Tribunal in this appeal.
Court: CESTAT Kolkata Date of Order: 2019-03-07
In view of the above discussions and reasons explained in thepresent Misc.Application, the order dismissing the Appeal, is recalled and the appeal is restored to its original number. Appeal to be listed for hearing in due course. Miscellaneous Application (ROA) is allowed.
Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-03-07
It has also been submitted that the said packing machine is still lying sealed in a sealed room, the key of which is with the Central ExciseOfficers. The Tribunal has erred in not getting the factual position verified by a court Commissioner appointed by it.
Court: CESTAT Kolkata Date of Order: 2019-03-06
Along with the present appeal, the appellant has also filed stay petition requesting for waiver of pre-deposit of duty as required to be deposited in terms of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944
Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-03-05
Considering the above fact that it is apparent that this Tribunal committed error in dismissing appeal under Litigation Policy, inadvertently and the mistake needs to be rectified and hence we recall the order for a fresh hearing. The appeal restored to its original number. Hearing is fixed on 24 April, 2019.
Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-03-01
Accordingly, we recall our Final Order dated 10th August, 2018 and restore the appeal to its original number. Final hearing is fixed on 22nd April, 2019. Issue notice to the respondent-assessee both by speed post and by fax/email.