Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Pacific Industries Mumbai

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Pacific Industries Mumbai

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided May 25, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/23372

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/23372
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: May 25, 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

Pacific Industries Mumbai

Excerpt

2. the commissioner (appeals) in his order has held that the show cause notice issued to pacific industries which resulted in the order of the additional commissioner, mumbai-iii was without jurisdiction because it was issued by the additional commissioner, mumbai-iii whereas the assessee is in mumbai-ii. this finding is questioned in this appeal.3. the representative of the respondent accepts that this finding is incorrect and that the show cause notice cannot be said to be lacking jurisdiction on this ground.4. accordingly i allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order. the commissioner (appeals) shall now decide upon the appeal on merits.

Full Judgment

2. The Commissioner (Appeals) in his order has held that the show cause notice issued to Pacific Industries which resulted in the order of the Additional Commissioner, Mumbai-III was without jurisdiction because it was issued by the Additional Commissioner, Mumbai-III whereas the assessee is in Mumbai-II. This finding is questioned in this appeal.

3. The representative of the respondent accepts that this finding is incorrect and that the show cause notice cannot be said to be lacking jurisdiction on this ground.

4. Accordingly I allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order. The Commissioner (Appeals) shall now decide upon the appeal on merits.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs Pacific Industries Mumbai Same Subject Excise