Gujarat High Court
Jaisal Silk Mills Private Limited vs The Commissioner, Central Excise ... on 13 September, 2023
Bench: Bhargav D. Karia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/TAXAP/597/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/09/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/TAX APPEAL NO. 597 of 2023
===============================================================
JAISAL SILK MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED
Versus
THE COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE AND CGST
================================================================
Appearance:
MR. S S IYER(6553) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
for the Opponent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
Date : 13/09/2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV)
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.S.S.Iyer for the
appellant.
2. This Tax Appeal is filed under Section 35G
of the Central Excise Act, 1944 raising
following substantial questions of law arising
out of the judgment and order dated 17 th
August, 2022 passed by the Customs, Excise &
Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad in
Excise Appeal No.10721 of 2018 :-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/TAXAP/597/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/09/2023
undefined
"(a) Whether in the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal
has committed substantial error of law
by not following the judgement of this
Honourable High Court in the case of
Prayagraj Dyeing And Printing Mills
Private Ltd Versus Union of India(2013)
290 ELT 61 in respect of the delay in
issue of show cause notice under
Section 11 A of the Central Excise Act,
1944?
(b) Whether in the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal
has committed substantial error of law
by not following the judgement of this
Honourable High Court in long line of
judgements starting with the case of
Pooja Tex Prints Private Limited versus
Union of India-(2018) GSTL 129 in the
light of the original adjudicating
authority taking almost full 9 years
for adjudication of the show cause
notice after the first remand order
dated 08.01.2009 passed by the
Tribunal?
(c) Whether in the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal
has committed substantial error of law
by not considering the judgements
regarding grant of cross-examination
and the interpretation of section 9D of
the Central Excise Act, 1944 by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/TAXAP/597/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/09/2023
undefined
jurisdictional High Court and other
High courts in India?
(d) Whether in the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal
has committed substantial error of law
by remanding the case second time in
August 2022 to the original
adjudicating authority in respect of
the show cause notice dated
14.12.2006?"
3. The Tribunal in its order observed as
under :
"2. Heard both sides and perused the
appeal records.
2.1 I have gone through the submissions
and impugned orders and noticed that in
the present matters Ld. Commissioner
has passed the impugned common orders
on the basis of common findings without
discussing the submission separately of
each Appellant and their involvement.
Therefore I am of the view that the
entire matter needs to be reconsidered
by the adjudicating authority.
3. Accordingly, I allow all these
appeals by way of remand, directing the
Adjudicating authority to decide the
matter afresh and pass the order
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/TAXAP/597/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/09/2023
undefined
accordingly."
4. The Tribunal by the impugned order has
only remanded the matter directing the
authority to decide the matter afresh.
5. We do not find any question of law much-
less substantial question of law arising in
the present appeal. Hence, the appeal is
dismissed.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)
(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J)
PALAK
