2018 (8) TMI 1393

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....SST.SOLICITOR, SRI.P. GOPINATH MENON, SC,CEN.BOARD OF EX, SRI.JOHN VARGHESE, SC, CEN.BOARD OF EXCIS AND SRI.P.R.SREJITH, SC, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE For The Respondent : SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SRI. BALAGOPAL SMT. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI AND KUM.SOUMYA PRAKASH AND SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL JUDGMENT This writ petition has been filed by the Commissioner of Central Excis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mported inputs and used in the manufacture of final produce is paid under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1962 and hence that the first respondent is not eligible for grant of rebate under the applicable notification dated 06.09.2004. It transpires that the first respondent took up the matter in appeal which was, however, dismissed and that he thus filed a Revision Application before the seco....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of goods is not disputed' (sic). 5. It, therefore, becomes ineluctable from Exhibit P3 that the only reason for the Revisional Authority to have allowed the application of the first respondent, which was disabled from obtaining the benefit of rebate/draw back/ cenvat credit or cash refund of CVD, was because that 'such procedural irregularities, cannot be then used to the detriment of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... law. 6. In such perspective, I am certain that Exhibit P3 cannot be allowed to continue in force in the manner it has now been drafted and that it will be up to the second respondent to pass a fresh order on the Revision Application filed by the first respondent, taking note of the various relevant factors involved and to conclude as to what are the procedural irregularities and how it has imp....