Skip to content


Sundaram Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation
CourtCustoms Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided On
Case Number Appeal No. E/S/88/10 and E/149/10 [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.448/2009 dt. 31.12.2009 pa
Judge
AppellantSundaram Industries Ltd.
RespondentCommissioner of Central Excise, Chennai
Advocates:For the Appellant: Ms. Uma Maheswari, Advocate. For the Respondent: A.B. Niranjan Babu, SDR.
Excerpt:
.....of both sides, as the issue in dispute stands decided in the case of the same assessee vide final order.797/10 dt. 19.7.2010. 2. the impugned order was passed following the ratio of the hon’ble bombay high court in cce thane vs nicholas piramal (india) ltd. [2009 (244) elt 321 (bom.)]. law has been amended retrospectively by the finance act, 2010. hence taking note of the retrospective change, we set aside the impugned order and remit the case for fresh decision to the adjudicating authority for taking into account the retrospectively amended provision of law. 3. the appeal is thus allowed by way of remand.
Judgment:

Per Jyoti Balasundaram

1. At the outset, we note that out of the total demand of Rs.42,31,516/-, Rs.18,12,080/- stands reversed. We accept the payment already made as sufficient for the purpose of compliance with the statutory requirement of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and waive predeposit of the balance amounts and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal which is taken up for final hearing today, with the consent of both sides, as the issue in dispute stands decided in the case of the same assessee vide Final Order.797/10 dt. 19.7.2010.

2. The impugned order was passed following the ratio of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CCE Thane Vs Nicholas Piramal (India) Ltd. [2009 (244) ELT 321 (Bom.)]. Law has been amended retrospectively by the Finance Act, 2010. Hence taking note of the retrospective change, we set aside the impugned order and remit the case for fresh decision to the adjudicating authority for taking into account the retrospectively amended provision of law.

3. The appeal is thus allowed by way of remand.




Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //