What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court confirmed the CESTAT order but kept all questions of law open for future agitation by the Revenue.

The Revenue appealed a CESTAT order. The Supreme Court noted that the revenue effect of the appeal was meager.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the appeal by the Revenue against a CESTAT order, with the court considering the meager revenue effect.

Commnr. of Customs vs Denso Kirloskar Indus. Pvt.Ltd | Supreme Court 2012

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1150 OF 2004 COMMNISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI ... APPELLANT VERSUS DENSO KIRLOSKAR INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LTD. ... RESPONDENT O R D E R 1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties to the lis. 2. In this appeal, the Revenue is questioning the correctness or otherwise of the judgment and order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'CESTAT'), Bangalore in Appeal No.C/28/2003 dated 22.8.2003. 3. For the purpose of disposal of this appeal, it may not be necessary to notice the facts in detail, since we are disposing of this appeal on a short ground. 4. In this appeal, Revenue effect is too meager. Therefore, it would be sufficient to keep the questions of law open, if the Revenue wants to agitate the same in an appropriate appeal.

Accordingly, we dispose of the appeal and confirm the order passed by the CESTAT. However, we keep all the questions of law open, to be agitated by the Revenue in an appropriate case, if they so desire. No order as to costs. Ordered accordingly. ...................J. (H.L. DATTU) ...................J. (ANIL R. DAVE) NEW DELHI; FEBRUARY 29, 2012

COMMNR. OF CUSTOMS vs. DENSO KIRLOSKAR INDUS. PVT.LTD

What did the Supreme Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments