Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Kumar Engg. Corpn. and anr.

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Kumar Engg. Corpn. and anr.

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Punjab and Haryana Decided May 03, 2002

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/635926

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/635926
Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Judge: Jawahar Lal Gupta and; N.K. Sud, JJ.
Decided On: May 03, 2002
Case Number: CCES No. 10 of 2001
Subject: Excise
Disposition: Petition dismissed

Case Summary

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

Central Excise Act, 1944;Section 35H(1) - Reference to High Court--Whether gate passes issued prior to 1.4.94 but endorsed after that date would fall under the coverage of Entry No. 10 in the table to the Notification No. 16/94-CE (NT) dated 30.3.94 and would consequently become eligible document for taking credit u...

Key legal issue: Excise
Outcome / disposition: Petition dismissed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Advocate Mr. Rajesh Gumber

Respondent

Kumar Engg. Corpn. and anr.

Legal References

Reported In: 2002(82)ECC51

Excerpt

central excise act, 1944;section 35h(1) - reference to high court--whether gate passes issued prior to 1.4.94 but endorsed after that date would fall under the coverage of entry no. 10 in the table to the notification no. 16/94-ce (nt) dated 30.3.94 and would consequently become eligible document for taking credit under the modvat scheme? - jawahar lal gupta, j.1. the revenue has filed this petition under section 35h(1) of the central excise act, 1944. it stated that the following question arises for the opinion of this court:whether gate passes issued prior to 1.4.94 but endorsed after that date would fall under the coverage of entry no. 10 in the table to the notification no. 16/94-ce (nt) dated 30.3.94 and would consequently become eligible document for taking credit under the modvat scheme?2. mr. rajesh gumber, learned counsel for the petitioner, very fairly states that the matter is concluded against the revenue by the judgment of the gujarat high court in commissioner of central excise, ahmedabad-i v. gujarat medicraft pvt. ltd. 2001 (75) ecc 256 (guj) reference application nos. 16, 26, 27/2000 decided on november 22, 2000. he further states that the decision has been accepted by the central board of excise and customs.3. in view of the statement of the counsel the question is answered against the revenue.4. the petition is dismissed in limine as no referable question of law arises for the opinion of this court.

Full Judgment

Jawahar Lal Gupta, J.

1. The Revenue has filed this petition under Section 35H(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. It stated that the following question arises for the opinion of this Court:

Whether gate passes issued prior to 1.4.94 but endorsed after that date would fall under the coverage of Entry No. 10 in the table to the Notification No. 16/94-CE (NT) dated 30.3.94 and would consequently become eligible document for taking credit under the Modvat scheme?

2. Mr. Rajesh Gumber, learned Counsel for the petitioner, very fairly states that the matter is concluded against the Revenue by the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-I v. Gujarat Medicraft Pvt. Ltd. 2001 (75) ECC 256 (Guj) Reference Application Nos. 16, 26, 27/2000 decided on November 22, 2000. He further states that the decision has been accepted by the Central Board of Excise and Customs.

3. In view of the statement of the counsel the question is answered against the Revenue.

4. The petition is dismissed in limine as no referable question of law arises for the opinion of this Court.

Same Court & Year Punjab and Haryana · 2002 Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs Kumar Engg. Corpn. and anr. Same Subject Excise Same Judge Jawahar Lal Gupta and; N.K. Sud, JJ.

Excise