TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court overturns Tribunal's decision for non-compliance, remands case back for substantive review</h1> <h3>Shiv Shakti Steels Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner</h3> Shiv Shakti Steels Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner - 2014 (310) E.L.T. A45 (Chhattisgarh) Issues:Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act against Tribunal's order and Commissioner's order, waiver of pre-deposit of tax, non-compliance leading to dismissal of appeal, deposit of required amount with interest, setting aside Tribunal and Commissioner's orders, remanding the matter for decision on merits.Analysis:The High Court dealt with an appeal filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, and the Commissioner's order. The Assessee was issued a show cause notice regarding the reversal of Cenvat credit claimed for certain goods. Subsequently, the Adjudicating Officer confirmed the notice, ordering recovery of a specific amount along with interest and penalty. The Assessee appealed before the Commissioner, seeking waiver of pre-deposit of tax, which was partly allowed, requiring a deposit of a sum which the Assessee failed to comply with, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.The High Court noted that the Assessee had now deposited the required amount along with interest as per the Commissioner's order. Considering this development and the fact that the case was not decided on merits, the High Court deemed it appropriate to set aside the Tribunal and Commissioner's orders and remand the matter back to the Commissioner for a decision on merits. The High Court scheduled a date for the parties to appear before the Commissioner, instructing the Assessee to file a certified copy of the order. The Commissioner was given the discretion to decide the appeal on merits on the scheduled date or adjourn the case for further proceedings.In conclusion, the High Court disposed of the tax case with the observation that the matter should be reconsidered by the Commissioner on merits, given the deposit made by the Assessee and the lack of a substantive decision on the case previously. The judgment focused on ensuring a fair consideration of the case based on its merits, emphasizing compliance with procedural requirements and the need for a thorough review of the appeal.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
