Sharp Leathers Ltd. and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Sharp Leathers Ltd. and anr. vs Commissioner of Customs

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Aug 31, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/25326

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/25326
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: S T Gowri, G Srinivasan
Decided On: Aug 31, 2001
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sharp Leathers Ltd. and anr.

Respondent

Commissioner of Customs

Legal References

Reported In: (2002)(79)ECC746

Excerpt

1. appeals taken up for disposal with the consent of both sides, after waiving deposit.2. the appeals are against the order of the commissioner demanding duty from the appellant and imposing a penalty on it on the ground that the benefit of notification 203/92 was not available to the goods imported by them, for the reason that modvat credit had been availed of in the manufacture of the exported product.3. the representative of the appellant contends that the appellant had not taken any credit of the duty paid in the manufacture of exported product. he contends that no hearing was granted to the appellant by the commissioner. without going into the merits, we note that the show cause notice does not disclose any material based on which it is alleged that modvat credit was taken. we are of the view that the claim made before us to be considered by the commissioner.4. the appeals are accordingly allowed and the impugned order set aside. the commissioner shall consider the evidence that the representative of the appellant undertakes to produce before him within two months from the receipt of this order, and adjudicate on the notices in accordance with law.

Full Judgment

1. Appeals taken up for disposal with the consent of both sides, after waiving deposit.

2. The appeals are against the order of the Commissioner demanding duty from the appellant and imposing a penalty on it on the ground that the benefit of Notification 203/92 was not available to the goods imported by them, for the reason that modvat credit had been availed of in the manufacture of the exported product.

3. The representative of the appellant contends that the appellant had not taken any credit of the duty paid in the manufacture of exported product. He contends that no hearing was granted to the appellant by the Commissioner. Without going into the merits, we note that the show cause notice does not disclose any material based on which it is alleged that modvat credit was taken. We are of the view that the claim made before us to be considered by the Commissioner.

4. The appeals are accordingly allowed and the impugned order set aside. The Commissioner shall consider the evidence that the representative of the appellant undertakes to produce before him within two months from the receipt of this order, and adjudicate on the notices in accordance with law.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Sharp Leathers Ltd. and anr. vs Commissioner of Customs Same Subject Excise Same Judge S T Gowri, G Srinivasan