Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. Repl Engineering Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise, vs Repl Engineering Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Sep 04, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/25398

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/25398
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Sep 04, 2001
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

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

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise,

Respondent

Repl Engineering Ltd.

Excerpt

1. the above application for early hearing filed by the revenue is allowed and we take up the appeal itself for disposal.2. we find that the commissioner (appeals) has relied upon the decisions of the tribunal in order no. c-1/4362-4364/wzb/1998 holding that the activity of making cable joint kit does not amount to manufacture. the tribunal has relied upon the judgment of the hon'ble andhra pradesh high court and also the cbec circular dated 27/03/1997.3. in the ground of appeal before the tribunal the revenue has not contested the reliance by the lower appellate authority on the tribunal decision cited supra. since the commissioner (appeals) has rightly followed the decisions of the tribunal on the same issue in the respondent's own case no infirmity arises in the impugned order.4. we accordingly uphold the order of the commissioner (appeals) and reject the appeal.

Full Judgment

1. The above application for early hearing filed by the Revenue is allowed and we take up the appeal itself for disposal.

2. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the decisions of the Tribunal in order No. C-1/4362-4364/WZB/1998 holding that the activity of making cable joint kit does not amount to manufacture. The Tribunal has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court and also the CBEC circular dated 27/03/1997.

3. In the ground of appeal before the Tribunal the Revenue has not contested the reliance by the lower appellate authority on the Tribunal decision cited supra. Since the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly followed the decisions of the Tribunal on the same issue in the respondent's own case no infirmity arises in the impugned order.

4. We accordingly uphold the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and reject the appeal.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise, vs Repl Engineering Ltd. Same Subject Service Tax