Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Electro Mech. Engineering Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Electro Mech. Engineering vs Collector of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Nov 03, 2000
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/19638

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On
Subject
Excise

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Excise

Key legal issue
Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Electro Mech. Engineering

Respondent

Collector of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In
(2001)(127)ELT115TriDel

Excerpt

1. the applicants filed this rectification of mistake application in respect of final order no. 1078/99-b1, dated 5-10-1999 passed on appeal no. e/112/93-b1 filed by the commissioner of central excise, rajkot.3. the contention of the applicants in the application is that the applicants, who were respondents in the appeal, had filed a cross-objection no. 127/93-b in the year 1993. the final order was passed without taking into consideration the cross-objection filed by the applicants. the submission of the applicants is also that, vide letter dated 5-7-1999, the applicants made a request to decide the appeal on merits and in this letter the applicants particularly relied upon the circular no. 82/82/94-cx, dated 5-12-1994 issued by the board in respect of classification of domestic flour mills. a copy of the circular was also enclosed with the letter.4. the contention of the revenue is that the impugned order was in favour of the applicants and they had no right to file any cross-objection and the cross-objections were only in the nature of counter.5. we have perused the record. the applicants had filed the cross-objections and the final order was passed without considering the cross-objections. the circular issued by the board, a copy of which was also filed with the letter dated 5-7-1999, was also not considered at the time of passing the final order. in this view of the matter, we hold that the appeal should have been decided after considering the cross-objections and the circular issued by the board. accordingly, the rectification of mistake application is allowed and the final order no.1078/99-b1, dated 5-10-1999 is recalled for fresh consideration and the appeal is restored to its original number.

Full Judgment

1. The applicants filed this rectification of mistake application in respect of Final Order No. 1078/99-B1, dated 5-10-1999 passed on Appeal No. E/112/93-B1 filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot.

3. The contention of the applicants in the application is that the applicants, who were respondents in the appeal, had filed a cross-objection No. 127/93-B in the year 1993. The Final Order was passed without taking into consideration the cross-objection filed by the applicants. The submission of the applicants is also that, vide letter dated 5-7-1999, the applicants made a request to decide the appeal on merits and in this letter the applicants particularly relied upon the Circular No. 82/82/94-CX, dated 5-12-1994 issued by the Board in respect of classification of Domestic Flour Mills. A copy of the circular was also enclosed with the letter.

4. The contention of the revenue is that the impugned order was in favour of the applicants and they had no right to file any cross-objection and the cross-objections were only in the nature of counter.

5. We have perused the record. The applicants had filed the cross-objections and the Final Order was passed without considering the cross-objections. The Circular issued by the Board, a copy of which was also filed with the letter dated 5-7-1999, was also not considered at the time of passing the Final Order. In this view of the matter, we hold that the appeal should have been decided after considering the cross-objections and the Circular issued by the Board. Accordingly, the rectification of mistake application is allowed and the Final Order No.1078/99-B1, dated 5-10-1999 is recalled for fresh consideration and the appeal is restored to its original number.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial