SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

M.GOURI SHANKAR MURTHY, S.D.JHA, I.J.RAO
Motilal and Co. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Bombay – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.S. Sahni,Mahesh Kumar

ORDER

I.J. Rao, Member (T)

1. This is a revision application filed before the Central Government, which, under section 35P(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, stands transferred to the Tribunal to be disposed of as if it were an appeal presented before the Tribunal.

2. In this appeal the appellants challenged the validity of the impugned order of the Collector on four main grounds : -

(i) The Show Cause Notice was issued by the Collector on 7-6-80 whereas the order sought to be reviewed therein was passed by the Assistant Collector on 21-7-79. Therefore, the show cause notice was barred under section 35A(3)(b) ;

(ii) The show cause notice is vague as no amount was mentioned therein in accordance with Rule 10 of section 11 A. The show cause notice was invalid on this ground also in view of the case law in the matter of J.B. A. Printing Inks Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors. reported in 1980 E.L.T. 121 (Bom.) ;

(iii) There was denial of natural justice by the Collector while passing the impugned order as he ignored the case law cited by the appellants ;

(iv) The impugned order is contrary to the Trade Notice No. 128 (M.P.) All Goods (NES)/75.

3. With reference to the ground (i) t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top