M/S FARWOOD INDUSTRIES (P) LTD. vs. COMMNR.OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
C.A. No.-003715-003715 - 2005Supreme Court17 January 20071 pages
For Respondent: B. KRISHNA PRASAD
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court found that the orders passed by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner required reconsideration in light of a previous judgment. The matter was remitted back to the Commissioner for a fresh disposal.

What were the facts?

The appellant, M/s Farwood Industries (P) Ltd., appealed against an order passed by the Assessing Officer and affirmed by the Commissioner of Central Excise. The appellant relied on a previous Supreme Court judgment.

What were the issues?

Whether the orders passed by the revenue authorities were in accordance with the law, particularly in light of a relevant Supreme Court judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 3715 of 2005 PETITIONER: M/S FARWOOD INDUSTRIES (P) LTD. ....APPELLANT(S) RESPONDENT: COMMNR.OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI ...RESPONDENT(S) DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17/01/2007 BENCH: Dr.AR.LAKSHMANAN & V.S. SIRPURKAR

JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT O R D E R Heard Mr.A.K.Ganguly, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Mr.Subba Rao, learned counsel for the respondent.

We have perused the order passed by the Assessing Officer and also the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai.

The learned senior counsel for the appellant at the time of hearing relied upon the Judgment in M/s.Craft Interiors Pvt.Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore & Anr. reported in 2006 (11) Scale 78 and in particular paragraph 17 of the said Judgment. In view of the above Judgment, the order passed by the Assessing Officer and as affirmed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai requires re-consideration. We, therefore, remit the matter to the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III for a fresh disposal in accordance with law.

The appeals stands allowed accordingly.

Both parties are at liberty to place additional documents before the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →