Commissioner Central Excise Commissioner. Ldh v. M/S Essar Steel Limited (Sales Depot) Ludhiana

CEA No.98 of 2011 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CEA No.98 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision.21.08.2018 Commissioner of Central Excise Commissionerate Ludhiana ...Appellant Vs M/s Essar Steel Limited

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Anshuman Chopra , Advocate for the appellant.

-.- RAJESH BINDAL J.

The appellant in the present appeal has challenged the order dated 16.03.2011 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi arising out of Appeal No.E/1312/2005-EX(DB), raising the following substantial questions of law:- "(i) Whether or not a dealer of inputs registered under erstwhile Rule 57GG is liable to follow the procedure prescribed under the Rules for passing on the credit to a manufacturer?

(ii) Whether credit is admissible without following the provisions laid down under the Statute?

(iii) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal is correct in quashing the penalty imposed on the respondent under Rule 209A of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 when penalty was imposed in accordance with the PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.08.27 11:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CEA No.98 of 2011 (O&M) -2provisions of law and the contravention thereof by the respondent is clearly evident from the facts on record; and (iv) Whether Tribunal is correct in relying upon its order against which appeal of the department is pending decision before the Hon'ble High Court." At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the amount involved in the present appeal is ` 37,55,264/-. As the amount involved is less than the limit prescribed in the Circular issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (Judicial Cell) dated 11.07.2018, the present appeal be dismissed as not maintainable.

Ordered accordingly.

However, it is made clear that dismissal of present appeal will not be taken as upholding the order passed by the Tribunal as the legal issue raised therein is left open to be considered in an appropriate case.

(RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE (AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE August 21, 2018 Pankaj*/yogesh sharma Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.08.27 11:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document