2023 (2) TMI 213

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Bharathi and Nachiketa Joshi, Advocates and B. Krishna Prasad, AOR, for the Appellant. Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. Advocate, Aditya Bhattacharya, Ms. Apeksha Mehta, Ms. Mounica Kasturi and Pranav Mundra, Advocates and M.P. Devanath, AOR, for the Respondent. ORDER As common question of law arises in this group of appeals and, as such, arise out of the impugned common judgment and order dated 2-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ue on the ground that the appeals before the High Court were not maintainable in view of Section 35L of the Central Excise Act and the appeals ought to have been filed/preferred before this Court. 6. It is required to be noted that the question was whether respondents were liable to pay the Central Excise duty or not. The question is/was whether the respondents can be said to be manufactur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8. In the case of Motorola India Limited (supra), while considering the pari materia provisions under the Customs Act, namely, Section 130 of the Customs Act, it is observed and held in para 11 as under : "11. Upon a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it could thus be seen that an appeal shall lie to the High Court against every order passed in appeal by the Appellate....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as committed a very serious error in not entertaining the appeals and relegating the Revenue to prefer the appeals before this Court. As the High Court has not considered the appeals on merits and/or on any other question, we have no other alternative but to remand the matter to the High Court to decide the appeals in accordance with law and on its own merits. 10. In view of the above and ....