SPM TELECOM Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALTHOUGH a miscellaneous order was passed by Division Bench on 30 -11 -2009 and that Bench has exercised jurisdiction, this matter is placed before the Single Member Bench today. It clearly shows that the Registry has failed to exercise vigilance to conduct appropriate scrutiny of the file. Therefore, the Registry is required to explain why appropriate measure for the default should not be taken to prevent such recurrence in future. So also explanation of the Court Master is required to be furnished to the Bench on the next date of hearing. A copy of this order may also be sent to the headquarter for placing it before the Honble President. While sending copy of this order, it is required to annex a copy of the order dt. 30 -11 -2009 passed by the Division Bench.

(2.) AFTER dictating this order, the Court Master points out that the Division Bench on 2 -8 -2010 has ordered to place this matter before Single Member Bench. Ld. DR explains that the matter relates to grant of cenvat credit on outward transport issues which are akin to ABB Ltd.s case and judgment thereon is awaited from the Honble High Court of Karnataka. Once such a position comes to notice, it is very difficult to conceive that a Single Member Bench should intervene while similar such matter is pending before Honble High Court of Karnataka. Therefore, Registry is directed to place the matter before Division Bench to re -consider exercise of appropriate jurisdiction by Bench.