TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1508
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ati, Advocate for the Appellant Shri R K Agarwal, Superintendent ( AR ) for the Respondent ORDER SOMESH ARORA 1. In the instant case, the learned Advocate states that matter on merits was decided in favour of the revenue by decision of this Bench only as reported vide Final Order No. A/2551/WZB/AHD/2011 dated 21.12.2011 and same is accepted by them. Therefore, their clients who are a public se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s H.M. M. Limited reported in 1995 (76) ELT 497 (SC) * Kaur & Singh Vs CCE reported in 1997 (94) ELT 289 (SC) * Raj Bhahadur Narain Singh Sugar Mills Ltd Vs UOI reported in 1996 (88) ELT 24 (SC) * Nizam Sugar Factory Vs CCE reported in 2006 (197) ELT 465 (S.C) * ECE Industries Limited Vs CCE 2004 (164) ELT 236 (SC) 2. He particularly states that there was a Larger Bench Constituted in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that despite the administrative authority directing the appellants to take central excise license, there was complete defiance on their part and they never took the license and this deliberate act of not complying with the directions of the administrative authority itself constitutes "an intend to evade". 4. In rejoinder, the learned Advocate points that this proposition of direction to take lic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....terpretation. Therefore, their stand of litigating in the facts and circumstances of the case despite being asked to take license was justified. 6. We have gone through their adversarial arguments. We find that the position stated by the learned Advocate is correct and stands legally scrutinised right up to the level of Apex Court in the decisions of PADMINI PRODUCTS (cited supra) as well as BAID....