Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. R.D. Engineers

Commissioner of Central Excise, vs R.D. Engineers

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

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/26455

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/26455
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Oct 31, 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

R.D. Engineers

Excerpt

1. this appeal was filed by the revenue on 6.6.2001 against the order of the commissioner (appeals). in this judgment the commissioner had found that the goods sent to the job worker factory under rule 57f(4) of the central excise rules, 1944 had been received within 180 days but that the credit had been taken at a later date. in allowing the appeal he had referred to his earlier order no. rjb/m.ii/2000 dt. 14.9.2000.2. when this appeal had come for admission, revenue was asked whether an appeal had been filed in the earlier order. departmental representative places on record letter from the appealing commissioner to the effect that the earlier order of the commissioner (appeals) was accepted by the jurisdictional commissioner. in view of this situation i find that this appeal become infructuous and is dismissed.

Full Judgment

1. This appeal was filed by the Revenue on 6.6.2001 against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). In this judgment the Commissioner had found that the goods sent to the job worker factory under Rule 57F(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 had been received within 180 days but that the credit had been taken at a later date. In allowing the appeal he had referred to his earlier Order No. RJB/M.II/2000 dt. 14.9.2000.

2. When this appeal had come for admission, Revenue was asked whether an appeal had been filed in the earlier order. Departmental Representative places on record letter from the appealing Commissioner to the effect that the earlier order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was accepted by the Jurisdictional Commissioner. In view of this situation I find that this appeal become infructuous and is dismissed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise, vs R.D. Engineers Same Subject Excise