2018 (10) TMI 1550 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT – TMI – Non-contest of demand by appellant on merits – demand of Interest under a situation where the Appellant always had balance in its cenvat credit account (more than the amount under dispute) throughout the disputed period – non-speaking order.
–
The Appeal is admitted in the substantial question of law on non-speaking order only – other questions not maintainable and is dismissed. – CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2018 Dated:- 23-10-2018 – M.S. SANKLECHA & RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ. Mr. Mahesh Raichandani, i/b UBR Legal, for the Appellant. Mr. Sham Walve, a/w Ms. Sneha Prabhu, for the Respondent. ORDER : 1. This Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 ( the Act ) challenges t
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
der a situation where the Appellant always had balance in its cenvat credit account (more than the amount under dispute) throughout the disputed period? (c) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct and justified in passing a nonspeaking order which does not give any finding on the merits of the matter and the submissions of the Appellant regarding demand of interest? 3. Regarding Question (a) : (a) The impugned order of the Tribunal records the fact that the Appellant has neither contested the demands on merits before the Lower Authority or before it. Thus, it had no occasion to deal with the merits of the demands. (b) Shri. Raichandani, the learned Counsel appearing in support of the Ap
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
d order being rectified, the facts stated therein have to be accepted as final. Thus, as no dispute on merits of the demand was recorded by the Tribunal, no substantial question of law can be said to arise in the present facts. (e) In the above view, the question as proposed does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus, not entertained. 4. Regarding Question (b) : (a) This question as raised is not an issue which has been urged by the Appellant before the Tribunal and therefore, the question does not arise from the impugned order of the Tribunal. (b) However, Shri. Raichandani seeks to invite our attention to the order of the Commissioner where this submission of the Appellant was recorded. It is on that basis Shri. Raichanda
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =