Collector of Central Excise Vs. Precision Fastners Ltd.

Collector of Central Excise vs Precision Fastners Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided May 25, 1987

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/3494

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/3494
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: May 25, 1987
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Collector of Central Excise

Respondent

Precision Fastners Ltd.

Advocate Shri. Sukumaran

Legal References

Reported In: (1987)(32)ELT417Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. the prayer in this application is for stay of the operation of the order of the collector (appeals) by which he directed refund of rs. 24,761.26 to the respondent. shri pattekar appearing for the collector only read out the statements made in the stay application.2. shri sukumaran appearing for the respondent submitted that the refund claim was for rs. 2,60,000/- originally. excepting the present claim, the rest had been already granted. he further submitted that they are paying central excise duty of rs. 40,00,000/- per month.therefore, the apprehension of the department that they would not be able to recover this paltry sum of rs. 24,000/- if they succeed in the appeal is totally baseless. shri pattekar did not reply to the statements made by shri sukumaran. shri pattekar did not dispute that the respondents have a factory within the jurisdiction of the collector. as stated earlier, we are satisfied with the statements made by shri sukumaran that they are paying rs. 40,00,000/- per month. the affidavit of the dy. collector appear to have been made without verifying the facts and in a cavaliar manner. on consideration of all the facts, we are satisfied that the application does not merit any consideration and accordingly we reject the same.

Full Judgment

1. The prayer in this application is for stay of the operation of the order of the Collector (Appeals) by which he directed refund of Rs. 24,761.26 to the respondent. Shri Pattekar appearing for the Collector only read out the statements made in the stay application.

2. Shri Sukumaran appearing for the Respondent submitted that the refund claim was for Rs. 2,60,000/- originally. Excepting the present claim, the rest had been already granted. He further submitted that they are paying Central Excise duty of Rs. 40,00,000/- per month.

Therefore, the apprehension of the Department that they would not be able to recover this paltry sum of Rs. 24,000/- if they succeed in the appeal is totally baseless. Shri Pattekar did not reply to the statements made by Shri Sukumaran. Shri Pattekar did not dispute that the respondents have a factory within the jurisdiction of the Collector. As stated earlier, we are satisfied with the statements made by Shri Sukumaran that they are paying Rs. 40,00,000/- per month. The affidavit of the Dy. Collector appear to have been made without verifying the facts and in a cavaliar manner. On consideration of all the facts, we are satisfied that the application does not merit any consideration and accordingly we reject the same.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Collector of Central Excise vs Precision Fastners Ltd. Same Subject Land Acquisition