The Commissioner of Central Vs. Welset Extrutionists

The Commissioner of Central vs Welset Extrutionists

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Sep 18, 2003

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/32333

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/32333
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: S T S.S.
Decided On: Sep 18, 2003
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

The Commissioner of Central

Respondent

Welset Extrutionists

Excerpt

1. revenue has filed this appeal against the order of commissioner (appeals) who has set aside the order of lower authority denying the benefit of credit of rs. 8,500/- and penally of rs. 5,000/- imposed on the respondent a manufacturer after coming to the findings :- i) as regards the two allegations in the show cause notice viz., that the dealer has no godown, to receive store and dispatched the goods, that the rg 23d register is not maintained by the dealer. these requirements not to be complied with by the manufacturer. ii) as regards the remaining allegation in the notice there is no dispute about the receipt of the goods or format of the invoice or duty paid nature, which indicate that manufacturer has taken proper steps to ensure taking credit of an duty paid goods since the department has failed to establish the non duty paid nature of the goods. there was no cause of penalty and or case for denial of credit. ii) invoices do not conform to the format as required under rule 57g. a) ground taken by revenue at s.no. (i) has been adequately dealt with by the commissioner (appeals) which has not been challenged. b) as regards ground at s.no. (ii), that was never the case before the lower authority and central excise (appeals) finding on being as presented cannot be challenged on bland statements without specifically pointing out the deficiency.4. in this view, this appeal is required to be dismissed, as being made on invalid grounds. ordered accordingly.

Full Judgment

1. Revenue has filed this appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) who has set aside the order of lower authority denying the benefit of credit of Rs. 8,500/- and penally of Rs. 5,000/- imposed on the respondent a manufacturer after coming to the findings :- i) As regards the two allegations in the show cause notice viz., that the dealer has no godown, to receive store and dispatched the goods, that the RG 23D Register is not maintained by the dealer.

These requirements not to be complied with by the manufacturer.

ii) As regards the remaining allegation in the notice there is no dispute about the receipt of the goods or format of the invoice or duty paid nature, which indicate that manufacturer has taken proper steps to ensure taking credit of an duty paid goods since the department has failed to establish the non duty paid nature of the goods. There was no cause of penalty and or case for denial of credit.

ii) Invoices do not conform to the format as required under Rule 57G. a) Ground taken by Revenue at S.No. (i) has been adequately dealt with by the Commissioner (Appeals) which has not been challenged.

b) As regards ground at S.No. (ii), that was never the case before the lower authority and Central Excise (Appeals) finding on being as presented cannot be challenged on bland statements without specifically pointing out the deficiency.

4. In this view, this appeal is required to be dismissed, as being made on invalid grounds. Ordered accordingly.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties The Commissioner of Central vs Welset Extrutionists Same Subject Excise Same Judge S T S.S.