The Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Nashik Versus Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.,
Central Excise
2018 (11) TMI 1287 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT – TMI
BOMBAY HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 21-11-2018
CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 28 OF 2018
Central Excise
AKIL KURESHI & M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ.
\nMr. Pradeep S. Jetly with Mr. J. B. Mishra, for the Appellant.
\nMs. Padmavati Patil with Mr. Anil Wani i\/b. ANS Law Associates, for the Respondent
\nP.C:
\nThis Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act), challenges the order dated 18th May, 2017 passed by the Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal).
\n2. Revenue urges the following questions of law, for our consideration:
\n“(a) Whether in the facts and in<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n assifiable under Chapter 8702.00 while it the Revenue's contention that its is appropriately classifiable under head 8703.00 of the Tariff Act. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Nashik Versus Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.,Central Excise2018 (11) TMI 1287 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT – TMIBOMBAY HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 21-11-2018CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 28 OF 2018 Central ExciseAKIL KURESHI & M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly with Mr. J. B. Mishra, for the Appellant. Ms. Padmavati … Continue reading “The Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Nashik Versus Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.,”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15193","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15193","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=15193"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15193\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15193"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15193"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15193"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. The questions as proposed by the Revenue arises out of an order of the Tribunal which essentially deal with an issue of appropriate classification. Therefore, an Appeal under Section 35G of the Act from an order on classification, is not maintainable before this Court.
\n5. In fact, Apex Court in Navin Chemicals Mfg. & Trading Co. Ltd., v\/s. Collector of Customs 2002 TIOL 460 has held that a dispute as to classification of goods directly relates to the rate of duty for purposes of assessment. Further, this Court in APM Terminals (I) Pvt. Ltd., v\/s. Commissioner of Central Excise 2018 TIOL 189<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n