2025-VIL-1511-CESTAT-HYD-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Department appeal against the dropping of the demand by the Adjudicating Authority and the subsequent upholding of the same by the Commissioner (Appeals) - Commissioner (Appeals) had relied on the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Indsur Global Ltd. v. UOI, which had held Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 as unconstitutional and ultra vires - HELD - Despite the low revenue involved in the present case, the issue of the constitutional validity of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 is still pending before the Supreme Court in other cases. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) should have taken into account the other pending judgments of the Supreme Court while deciding the issue, and not solely relied on the Gujarat High Court judgment, which had attained finality due to the low revenue involved - The ground of low revenue would not come into play for the Department to withdraw the appeal, as the issue involves the constitutional validity of the provisions or rules - the matter is still pending in view of the fact that Department has decided to move for restoration application in respect of three matters, which were earlier disposed of by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as not pressed, keeping in view the revenue involvement being more than the threshold limit. Presently, these restoration applications are still pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court - Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the issue afresh in accordance with the decisions of the Supreme Court in the pending cases – The appeal is allowed by way of remand

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page