COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GOODS SERVICE TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE v. MS AMUL CRANK CASE PRIVATE LIMITED
T.A./5/2022 · 2025-02-13
Deepak Roshan
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 19642 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 19642 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Tax Appeal No. 5 of 2022 Commissioner, Central Goods Service Tax & Central Excise (previously Commissioner Central Excise & Service Tax), Jamshedpur, having its office at (previous address 143 New Baradwari, Sakchi, P.O & P.S – Sakchi Jamshedpur, District-East Singhbhum) at present having its Office at GST Bhawan, Outer Circle Road, P.O & P.S- Bistupur, Jamshedpur – 831001, Singhbhum East. ... ... Appellant
Versus M/s Amul Crank Case Private Limited, (M/s V.B. Seth & Co.) having its Office Near Moti Tank, Dr. Radhakrishna Road, Rajkot, P.O & P.S- Rajkot, Gujarat – 360001.
... Respondent
--------- CORAM:
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
--------- For the Appellant : Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Sr. S.C. Mr. Anurag Vijay, Jr. S.C. Mr. Akshay Kumar, Advocate. Mr. Srijan, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Chowdhary, Advocate.
Mrs. Vani Kumari, Advocate.
--------- 07/Dated: 13.02.2025
Heard learned counsel for both sides and perused the order passed by CESTAT, Kolkata in Excise Appeal No. 365 of 2010 impugned herein.
We are satisfied that the CESTAT, Kolkata had rightly decided the appeal by applying the judgment of the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-IV Commissionerate v. Kyungshin Industrial Motherson Ltd., 2016 (332) ELT 69 (Mad.) and also the judgment of the Supreme Court in Escorts Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi, 2004 (171) ELT 145 (S.C.).
No substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed.
Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, stands disposed of.
(M. S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.)
(Deepak Roshan, J.) APK/VK