2015 (12) TMI 1156

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... K. Sanghi, Sr. Adv., Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv., Ms. Aruna Gupta, Adv. And Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. P. K. Manohar, Adv. ORDER Leave granted in SLP (C) No. 5819 of 2007. These two appeals are filed challenging the judgments of the High Court of Rajasthan whereby the excise duty and penalty which was paid by the respondents herein have been quashed. The proce....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....meaning of Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and therefore, no excise duty was payable. That dispute landed up in this Court and was finally decided in the case of 'Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Associated Stone Industries & Anr. [JT 2000 (6) SC 522] holding that it did not amount to manufacture activity. After this judgment was rendered, the assessees filed writ petition....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....id and justified in law. Insofar as the respondents are concerned, the duty was paid by them after proper adjudication and a particular view was taken which was upheld by the Tribunal as well. As mentioned above, no further appeals were brought by the respondents and, therefore, such proceedings had attained finality. The order of refund of this amount, merely because this Court took different vie....