REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Commissioner Of Central Excise, Dibrugarh Appellant

V/S

Khushi Aromatics Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

MILES INDIA LTD V. ASSTT. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS [REFERRED TO]
NAZIR AHMED V. KING EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
INCOME TAX OFFICER ALLEPPY VS. M C PONNOOSE [REFERRED TO]
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE CHANDIGARH VS. DOABA CO OPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI VS. GURNAM KAUR [REFERRED TO]
MARATHWADA UNIVERSITY VS. SESHRAO BALWANT RAO CHAVAN [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. KIRLOSKAR PNEUMATIC COMPANY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
L CHANDRA KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE VADODRA VS. ROHIT PULP PAPER MILLS [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. GANESH DAS BHOJRAJ [REFERRED TO]
ASSTT COLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE VS. KASHYAP ENGG AND METALLURGICALS PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE CHANDIGARH I VS. MARKFED VANASPATI AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES [REFERRED TO]
MOLY VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT SALT COMMISSIONER VS. SECRETARY CENTRAL SALT MAZDOOR UNION [REFERRED TO]
SANDIREDDY SUSEELA VS. GOVT OF A P MINISTRY OF WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS batch of three appeals were filed by Revenue against order dated 12.11.2007 passed by learned Commissioner, Dibrugarh dropping the charges levelled by show cause notice dated 13.9.2006 against the Respondents M/s. Khushi Aromatics and M/s Kothari Products Ltd. finding that these two Respondents were not related persons in terms of Section 4(3) of Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the proceeding was time barred without the extended period being invokable in absence of essential ingredients of proviso to Section 11A of the said Act. He also dropped the charges made by the Show Cause Notice against the Respondent M/s Kothari Products Ltd. and Sri Mitesh Kothari. A common order of adjudication was passed by the learned Adjudicating Authority to deal with the following allegations against the Respondents:

(2.) HEARING the Respondents and Considering their reply as well as submissions, learned Adjudicating Authority framed following issues in para B at page 26 and 27 of order of adjudication which read as under:

(3.) THE issues framed as above were decided in the adjudication in the following manner:

Click here to view full judgment.

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DIBRUGARH Vs. KHUSHI AROMATICS

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address