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.

Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. M/S. Shree Ganesh Rolling

Commissioner of Central Excise, vs M/S. Shree Ganesh Rolling

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Apr 27, 2001
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/22547

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

Commissioner of Central Excise,

Respondent

M/S. Shree Ganesh Rolling

Legal References

Reported In
(2001)(132)ELT309TriDel

Excerpt

1. the revenue filed this reference application for referring the following question of law to the hon'ble high court.: whether the electric control penal is a capital and was not a capital goods as per the definition of the goods under rule 57-q of the central excise rules." 2. when the case was called none appeared on behalf of the respondents in spite of notice.4. the tribunal in the final order held that the electric control panels are part of magnetic lifts which cannot be operated without these electric panels and those control panels are part of the lifts.the revenue is not disputing the fact that magnetic lifts are not entitled for the benefit of capital goods. in this situation clause (b) of the rule 57q comes into operation which into operation which indicates parts of the machine and machinery mentioned in clause (a) of the rule. in view of the definition of the capital goods which also includes parts, the question of law has framed, does not arise form the final order. in view of the above, i find no merit in this application, the same is rejected.

Full Judgment

1. The Revenue filed this Reference application for referring the following question of law to the Hon'ble High Court.: Whether the Electric Control Penal is a capital and was not a capital goods as per the definition of the goods under Rule 57-Q of the Central Excise Rules." 2. When the case was called none appeared on behalf of the respondents in spite of notice.

4. The Tribunal in the final order held that the Electric Control Panels are part of magnetic lifts which cannot be operated without these electric panels and those control panels are part of the lifts.

The Revenue is not disputing the fact that magnetic lifts are not entitled for the benefit of capital goods. In this situation Clause (b) of the Rule 57Q comes into operation which into operation which indicates parts of the machine and machinery mentioned in Clause (a) of the Rule. In view of the definition of the capital goods which also includes parts, the question of law has framed, does not arise form the final order. In view of the above, I find no merit in this application, the same is rejected.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial