Khandesh Extraction Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Khandesh Extraction Ltd. vs Commissioner of C. Ex.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jul 28, 2003

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/31737

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/31737
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: S T Gowri, A Wadhwa
Decided On: Jul 28, 2003
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Khandesh Extraction Ltd.

Respondent

Commissioner of C. Ex.

Legal References

Reported In: (2003)(156)ELT928Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. duty of rs. 34,240/- has been demanded and penalty of rs. 17,000/- imposed on the finding that the cinders which resulted in the burning of coal in the boilers of the applicant are liable to duty.2. the representative of the applicant relies upon the judgment of the supreme court dismissing the special leave petition filed by the union of india against the judgment of the bombay high court in century rayon & anr., 2002 (142) e.l.t. 319, holding that such cinder is not excisable. the departmental representative contends that the bombay high court had relied upon a judgment of the gujarat high court in ahmedabad electricity co. ltd. v. uoi, 2001 (131) e.l.t. 535 holding that cinder is not excisable and that stay of operation of this order had been stayed by the supreme court with regard to the particular assessee.3. that may be so, however, the assessee before us is within the jurisdiction of the bombay high court, the appeal against the judgment of which has been dismissed by the supreme court.4. accordingly we waive deposit of the duty and penalty and stay their recovery.

Full Judgment

1. Duty of Rs. 34,240/- has been demanded and penalty of Rs. 17,000/- imposed on the finding that the cinders which resulted in the burning of coal in the boilers of the applicant are liable to duty.

2. The representative of the applicant relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court dismissing the Special Leave Petition filed by the Union of India against the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Century Rayon & Anr., 2002 (142) E.L.T. 319, holding that such cinder is not excisable. The departmental representative contends that the Bombay High Court had relied upon a judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. UOI, 2001 (131) E.L.T. 535 holding that cinder is not excisable and that stay of operation of this order had been stayed by the Supreme Court with regard to the particular assessee.

3. That may be so, however, the assessee before us is within the jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court, the appeal against the judgment of which has been dismissed by the Supreme Court.

4. Accordingly we waive deposit of the duty and penalty and stay their recovery.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Khandesh Extraction Ltd. vs Commissioner of C. Ex. Same Subject Excise Same Judge S T Gowri, A Wadhwa