Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Bhavnagar Vegetable Products

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Bhavnagar Vegetable Products

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Mar 27, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/21809

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/21809
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Mar 27, 2001
Subject: Right to Information

Case Summary

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

Right to Information

Key legal issue: Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Respondent

Bhavnagar Vegetable Products

Excerpt

1. in its order allowing the appeal filed by the appellant before it, and holding that it was entitled to refund of the excise duty paid by it, the tribunal had exclusively relied upon the judgement of the bombay high court in solar pesticides vs. uoi 1992(57)elt201. that judgment has since been reversed by the supreme court reported in 2000 (116) elt 401. the application by the commissioner claims that there was therefore a mistake apparent on record in the tribunal's order.2. apart from the judgement of the high court that the counsel for the appellant points out, the larger bench of the tribunal in gujarat state fertilisers & chem, ltd. vs. cce 2000 (122) elt 282 has held that a decision of a court or a tribunal passed subsequent to the tribunal's decision cannot form a basis for seeking correction of that decision on the ground of mistake.

Full Judgment

1. In its order allowing the appeal filed by the appellant before it, and holding that it was entitled to refund of the excise duty paid by it, the Tribunal had exclusively relied upon the judgement of the Bombay High Court in Solar Pesticides vs. UOI 1992(57)ELT201. That judgment has since been reversed by the Supreme Court reported in 2000 (116) ELT 401. The application by the Commissioner claims that there was therefore a mistake apparent on record in the Tribunal's order.

2. Apart from the judgement of the High Court that the counsel for the appellant points out, the larger bench of the Tribunal in Gujarat State Fertilisers & Chem, Ltd. vs. CCE 2000 (122) ELT 282 has held that a decision of a court or a tribunal passed subsequent to the Tribunal's decision cannot form a basis for seeking correction of that decision on the ground of mistake.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs Bhavnagar Vegetable Products Same Subject Right to Information