2013 (10) TMI 1251

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Mr. Justice M. R. Shah) 1. All these Tax Appeals have been preferred by the common appellant-Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs challenging the impugned common judgment and order dated 22/11/2012 passed by the Central Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'CESTAT') in Appeal No. E/267 to 272/2012 with the following proposed substantial questions of law; ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... corporate veil to ascertain duty liability of the respondent no. 1 on the face of evidence on record establishing all ingredients i.e. mutuality of interest financial flowback, control of one unit over other and commonality of infrastructure indicating ulterior motive of the respondents herein to evade payment of duty by adopting device of setting separate unit, which are controlled by one family....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....action under the aforesaid Rule?" 2. Having noted the proposed substantial questions of law and the issue involved, we called upon the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant to satisfy how the present Tax Appeals before this Court would be maintainable. To the aforesaid, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant is not in a position to dispute that the identical que....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se Act would not be maintainable and the questions involved can only be decided by Hon'ble the Supreme Court under Section 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 4. We are fortified by the aforesaid view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court dated 03/07/2012 passed in Tax Appeal No. 973/2011 involving the similar issues holding that the Tax Appeal would not be maintainable under Sec....