TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (4) TMI 1241
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. A/11715-11727/2013, dated 9-12-2013 passed by the Tribunal. 2. The learned authorised representative for the Revenue submits that the Revenue filed appeal against the Final Order dated 9-12-2013 of the Tribunal before the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. By Judgment dated 13-11-2014 in Tax Appeal No. 990 of 2014 in the matter of Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Surat v. Shri Labdhi Prints, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court disposed the appeals with the direction to the Department to approach the Tribunal either by rectification or recalling the Final Order Nos. A/11715-11727/2013, dated 9-12-2013. He also drew the attention of the Bench para 3 of the instant application. It is submitted that the learned authorised representative....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... which were raised by unknown/non-existing firms. It is undisputed in these cases that appellants herein filed monthly returns/ER 1 returns to the departmental authority indicating there in the availment of Cenvat credit on such invoices. It is also undisputed that these invoices were found to be non-existence during the relevant period. Both sides agree that the issue involved in these cases is covered by the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Prayagraj Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India - 2013 (290) E.L.T. 61 (Guj.) in assessee's favour. On perusal of the said judgment, we find it so. Since the issue involved in these cases is covered by their lordships decision, respectfully following the said dec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ertaining the dispute of Department before us would deprive us of the analysis and opinion the Tribunal on the comparison of facts. In the result, subject to above liberty, all appeals are disposed of." 6. We find that the Tribunal passed the final order on the basis of the agreement of both the sides, as the issue involved in this case is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. The Commissioner of Central Excise, in instant application contended that the Departmental Representative wrongly agreed before the Tribunal, as the Department has not accepted by the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Prayagraj Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd. (supra). It is also contended that the authorised represe....