Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. M/S. J.K. Industries

Commissioner of Central Excise, vs M/S. J.K. Industries

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Apr 27, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/22537

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/22537
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On: Apr 27, 2001
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise,

Respondent

M/S. J.K. Industries

Excerpt

1. according to the revenue, there is an error in the tribunal's final order above mentioned in remanding the case to the jurisdictional assistant commissioner. the revenue contends that the case was to be remanded to the commissioner (appeals), since the assessee's (appeals) was not received by them was accepted by the tribunal. learned counsel also states that the matter was to be remanded to lower appellate authority.2. on hearing both sides and perusing the order,we agree with the revenue that an obvious mistake has occurred in our order and accordingly we rectify the same by directing that the case be remanded to the commissioner (appeals) for fresh determination of admissibility of credit to the assessees. he shall pass fresh orders after extending a reasonable opportunity to the assessees of being heard in person.

Full Judgment

1. According to the Revenue, there is an error in the Tribunal's Final Order above mentioned in remanding the case to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner. The Revenue contends that the case was to be remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals), since the assessee's (Appeals) was not received by them was accepted by the Tribunal. Learned Counsel also states that the matter was to be remanded to lower appellate authority.

2. On hearing both sides and perusing the order,we agree with the Revenue that an obvious mistake has occurred in our order and accordingly we rectify the same by directing that the case be remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh determination of admissibility of credit to the assessees. He shall pass fresh orders after extending a reasonable opportunity to the assessees of being heard in person.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise, vs M/S. J.K. Industries Same Subject Excise