Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2014 2 79 Hcmum PDF

    Uploaded by

    Dipesh Chandra Barua
    8 views4 pages

    Original Title

    2014-2-79-hcmum.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    8 views4 pages

    2014 2 79 Hcmum PDF

    Uploaded by

    Dipesh Chandra Barua

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 4
    2014] Theos of 1 sf awa Ne Pet Tras VCC ” 2014 (2) ECS (79) (HIC- Mum) In the High Court of Judicature at Bombay Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST. vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Date of decision:04.03.2014 Central Excise Appeal (Lodging) No. 383 of 2013 ‘Appearance Mr. V.Sreedharan, Sr. Advocate ‘Mr. Prakash Shah & Mr. Jas Sanghi i/ by PDS Legal For the appellant Mr. AS.Rao i/by Ms. Suchitra Kamble For the respondent ‘CORAM S.C. Dharmdhikati, J Grish $. Kulkarni, JJ “The Tribunal has recorded the prima facie findings that this is not a fit case for complete waiver. We do not find that such findings recorded by the Tribunal do not meet the requirement stipulated by law. The Tribunal at the stage at which the matter was brought before it was not required to render any final conclusion or opinion. Only limited jurisdiction that the Tribunal was exercising was whether the case was fit enough to direct the Public Sector Undertaking not to deposit any amount of the tax demanded and thus, relieve it from the condition of pre-deposit or partial deposit. In doing that the ‘Tribunal has referred to the materials produced. It has not made any detailed inquiry and rightly so. In these circumstances the Tribunal has not proceeded on misreading or misconstruction of sub-rule (3) or in applying the Rule, has omitted from consideration any of the material. In the above circumstances we do not find any merit in the Appeal.” (Para 7) “We find that the Division Bench was not laying down any absolute principle, but found that in the facts brought before it, the Petitioner ‘was the Government of India undertaking and the solvency was beyond doubt. The question raised before the Division Bench required serious consideration by the Tribunal, In that, the Division Bench rendered the judgment and concluded that there was prima facie case made out for complete waiver. It is in these circumstances the Division Bench 80 observed that ends of justice would be met by directing the Pet CS Law Reporter therein to execute a general bond. Beyond that we do not see any general rule laid down and that in all such cases the condition of pre-deposit can be waived by calling upon the Public Sector Undertaking to execute a general bond.” (Para 8) Pc: 1 ‘This Appeal is by the Board of Trustees of Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust challenging an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai on 17.09.2013 onan application for waiverof pre-

    You might also like