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.

Stak Cables Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Stak Cables vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Dec 15, 2005
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/41166

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

Stak Cables

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Excerpt

2. the appellants seek the stay of the operation of the impugned order passed by the commissioner (appeals) and recovery of amounts due. in the instant case, the duty demand of rs. 2,21,878/-(rupees two lakhs twenty one thousand eight hundred seventy eight only) has been confirmed with equal amount of penalty. the ld. counsel for the appellants submit that there was a show-cause-notice and the same has been settled under the scheme of kvss. according to him, the department has issued the show-cause- notice once again for the activity covering the same period and the same can not be permitted. he has relied upon the case of cce, calcutta-iii v. nicco corporation ltd. . it is observed in the above decision that another show-cause-notice in respect of identical goods for identical period and identical dispute for assessable value though on a different grounded, can not be raised against assessee.3. the ld. dr submits that the duty demand raised with present show-cause-notice dated 07.08.1998 amounting to rs. 2,21,878/- ( rupees two lakhs twenty one thousand eight hundred seventy eight only) has not been settled under kvss scheme.4. for the reasons discussed on the stay pending the hearing of the case against impugned order, therefore, i hereby direct appellants to make a pre-deposit of rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only) within a period of 6 weeks and report the compliance by 07.02.2006, subject to which further pre-deposit is waived and its recovery is stayed. stay applications are disposal of in the above terms.

Full Judgment

2. The appellants seek the stay of the operation of the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and recovery of amounts due. In the instant case, the duty demand of Rs. 2,21,878/-(Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty One Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Eight only) has been confirmed with equal amount of penalty. The ld. counsel for the appellants submit that there was a Show-Cause-Notice and the same has been settled under the Scheme of KVSS. According to him, the Department has issued the Show-Cause- Notice once again for the activity covering the same period and the same can not be permitted. He has relied upon the case of CCE, Calcutta-III v. Nicco Corporation Ltd. . It is observed in the above decision that another Show-Cause-Notice in respect of identical goods for identical period and identical dispute for assessable value though on a different grounded, can not be raised against assessee.

3. The ld. DR submits that the duty demand raised with present Show-Cause-Notice dated 07.08.1998 amounting to Rs. 2,21,878/- ( Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty One Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Eight only) has not been settled under KVSS scheme.

4. For the reasons discussed on the stay pending the hearing of the case against impugned order, therefore, I hereby direct appellants to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) within a period of 6 weeks and report the compliance by 07.02.2006, subject to which further pre-deposit is waived and its recovery is stayed. Stay applications are disposal of in the above terms.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial