Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. M/S. S. Kumar and Co. and Others

Commissioner of Central Excise, vs M/S. S. Kumar and Co. and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Feb 20, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/21030

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/21030
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Feb 20, 2001
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise,

Respondent

M/S. S. Kumar and Co. and Others

Excerpt

1. by the order impugned in this appeal, the commissioner has dropped the proposal in the show cause notice demanding duty from karnataka ginning & pressing factory, a processor of textile fabrics, proposing confiscation of the fabrics seized from the processor as well as from four other persons, and proposing penalty on sixty other persons. we are concerned in these appeals with these sixty respondents.2. the commissioner has relied upon the judgement of the delhi high court in pioneer silk mills pvt. ltd. vs. uoi 1995 (80) elt 507 for holding that penalty was not imposable. the ground for challenging her acceptance of this judgement suggests that high court has not taken note of some provisions of law. such an argument should appropriately be raised before the supreme court, to which we understand an appeal has been filed against the high court's order. this tribunal can by no means entertain such a claim. nor could the commissioner (appeals) refuse to ignore the judgement on this ground.

Full Judgment

1. By the order impugned in this appeal, the Commissioner has dropped the proposal in the show cause notice demanding duty from Karnataka Ginning & Pressing Factory, a processor of textile fabrics, proposing confiscation of the fabrics seized from the processor as well as from four other persons, and proposing penalty on sixty other persons. We are concerned in these appeals with these sixty respondents.

2. The Commissioner has relied upon the judgement of the Delhi High Court in Pioneer Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. UOI 1995 (80) ELT 507 for holding that penalty was not imposable. The ground for challenging her acceptance of this judgement suggests that High Court has not taken note of some provisions of law. Such an argument should appropriately be raised before the Supreme Court, to which we understand an appeal has been filed against the High Court's order. This Tribunal can by no means entertain such a claim. Nor could the Commissioner (appeals) refuse to ignore the judgement on this ground.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise, vs M/S. S. Kumar and Co. and ... Same Subject Land Acquisition