Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. C.E.G.A.T.

Commissioner of Central Excise vs C.E.G.A.T.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 21, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/823516

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/823516
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: R. Jayasimha Babu and ;Prabha Sri Devan, JJ.
Decided On: Mar 21, 2001
Case Number: R.C.P. No. 4 of 1996
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Advocate K. Veeraraghavan, ACGSC

Respondent

C.E.G.A.T.

Advocate None

Legal References

Reported In: 2001(133)ELT319(Mad)

Excerpt

- orderr. jayasimha babu, j.1. we have heard the learned counsel and perused the order of the tribunal. we are satisfied that a referable question of law requiring decision of this court does arise.2. the tribunal is directed to refer the following question of law and submit a statement of the case together with the material documents required for answering the question referred :-'whether the tribunal is right in holding that the revenue was in error in resorting to rule 57-1 and that the proper course for the revenue was to resort to rule 57c for recovery of the credit taken by the manufacturer on the inputs which had admittedly been used in the manufacture of the product for which exemption had been availed such exemption having been availed under general exemptions granted to the small scale industries ?'

Full Judgment

ORDER

R. Jayasimha Babu, J.

1. We have heard the learned Counsel and perused the order of the Tribunal. We are satisfied that a referable question of law requiring decision of this Court does arise.

2. The Tribunal is directed to refer the following question of law and submit a statement of the case together with the material documents required for answering the question referred :-

'Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that the Revenue was in error in resorting to Rule 57-1 and that the proper course for the Revenue was to resort to Rule 57C for recovery of the credit taken by the manufacturer on the inputs which had admittedly been used in the manufacture of the product for which exemption had been availed such exemption having been availed under General Exemptions granted to the Small Scale Industries ?'

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2001 Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs C.E.G.A.T. Same Subject Excise Same Judge R. Jayasimha Babu and ;Prabha Sri Devan, JJ.

Excise