Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. H.M. Polycontainers Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise vs H.M. Polycontainers Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jun 23, 2005
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/39448

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
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

H.M. Polycontainers Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In
(2006)(203)ELT628Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. revenue is in appeal. respondents have been granted the benefit of modvat credit inputs even though they have voluntarily paid duty when the goods manufactured were fully exempt.gothi plastic industries v. cce and judicial discipline requiring him to follow the same has been urged in the grounds taken in this appeal to be against cbec circular f.no.93/19/90 cex3 dt 4.1.1999 and thus not binding on the department and not relevant as these cases do not refer to the said circular. we cannot appreciate the reasoning of the commissioner in the ground taken. baord's circular are not binding on commissioner (appeals).however, in judicial discipline, the commissioner (appeals) is bound by the decision of the higher tribunal. the decision relied upon hold that it is the option of the assessee to avail an exemption. we find no reason to differ with the same. no merits are found in the ground of trade notices issued etc as taken. no contra decision shown. appeal of revenue is to be rejected and order of cce (a) upheld.

Full Judgment

1. Revenue is in appeal. Respondents have been granted the benefit of Modvat credit inputs even though they have voluntarily paid duty when the goods manufactured were fully exempt.Gothi Plastic Industries v. CCE and judicial discipline requiring him to follow the same has been urged in the grounds taken in this appeal to be against CBEC Circular F.No.93/19/90 CEX3 dt 4.1.1999 and thus not binding on the department and not relevant as these cases do not refer to the said circular. We cannot appreciate the reasoning of the Commissioner in the ground taken. Baord's Circular are not binding on Commissioner (Appeals).

However, in judicial discipline, the Commissioner (Appeals) is bound by the decision of the higher Tribunal. The decision relied upon hold that it is the option of the assessee to avail an exemption. We find no reason to differ with the same. No merits are found in the ground of Trade Notices issued etc as taken. No contra decision shown. Appeal of Revenue is to be rejected and order of CCE (A) upheld.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial