Cce, Pondicherry Vs. M/S. Manatec Electronics and Others

Cce, Pondicherry vs M/S. Manatec Electronics and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai Decided Sep 21, 2010

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/944478

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/944478
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Judge: The Honourable Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President &Amp; the Honourable Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member
Decided On: Sep 21, 2010
Case Number: Appeal Nos. E/246, E/247 & 248 of 2004
Subject: Right to Information

Case Summary

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

Right to Information

Key legal issue: Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cce, Pondicherry

Advocate Shri C. Rangaraju, Shri C. Dhanasekaran, SDR, for the Appellant. Ms. Uma Maheshwari, Advocate for the Respondents.

Respondent

M/S. Manatec Electronics and Others

Excerpt

per jyoti balasundaram 1. the issue in dispute in the above appeal namely as to whether erection and commissioning charges recovered from the assessees are required to be included in the assessable value on motor vehicle garage equipments manufactured and cleared by the assessees herein, stands decided against the revenue vide tribunal’s decisions in cce, pune vs. nichrome metal works p. ltd. - 2001 (135) elt 429 and emerson network power vs. cce, mumbai - 2002 (150) elt 722. the commissioner (appeals) has relied upon these decisions as well as upon other decisions of the tribunal. although revenue has filed an appeal against the tribunal’s order in nichrome metal works (supra) before the apex court, the appeal is still pending. following the decisions of the tribunal cited supra, we uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal.

Full Judgment

Per Jyoti Balasundaram

1. The issue in dispute in the above appeal namely as to whether erection and commissioning charges recovered from the assessees are required to be included in the assessable value on motor vehicle garage equipments manufactured and cleared by the assessees herein, stands decided against the Revenue vide Tribunal’s decisions in CCE, Pune Vs. Nichrome Metal Works P. Ltd. - 2001 (135) ELT 429 and Emerson Network Power Vs. CCE, Mumbai - 2002 (150) ELT 722. The Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon these decisions as well as upon other decisions of the Tribunal. Although Revenue has filed an appeal against the Tribunal’s order in Nichrome Metal Works (supra) before the apex Court, the appeal is still pending. Following the decisions of the Tribunal cited supra, we uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chen... Same Parties Cce, Pondicherry vs M/S. Manatec Electronics and Others Same Subject Right to Information Same Judge The Honourable Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President &Amp; t...

Right to Information Motor vehicle As well as