M/S Farwood Industries (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner Of Central Excise, Chennai (2007) — Supreme Court judgment

Headnote

The reporters’ summary of the points decided. It is not part of the judgment.

MIS. FARWOOD INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI JANUARY 17, 2007 [DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN AND V.S. SIRPURKAR, JJ.]

Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985: Hr.lures and Furniture-Difference between-Exigibility o/-Held, in view of the judgment in Mis. Craft Industries case*, the order passed by the Assessing OfJicer and as affirmed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, requires re-consideration-Matter remitted to the Commissioner of Central Excise for fresh disposal in accordance with law. *Mis. Craft Interiors Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise,Bangalore & Anr., (2006] 11 SCALE 78, relied on.

Judgment

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 3715 of2005. __ From the Final Judgment and Order No. 345/2005 dated 3.3.2005 of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench at Chennai in Appeal No. E/319111998.

A.K. Ganguly, Sr. Adv., Nikhil Nayyar and Amit Singhal for the Appellant. Subba Rao and B. Krishna Prasad for the Respondent.

The Order of the Court delivered : ORDER

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.

[2007] I S.C.R

The learned senior counsel for th~ appellant at the· time of hearing relied upon the Judgment in Mis.Craft Interiors Pvt.Ltd v. 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, ChennaiIII for a fresh disposal in accordance with law. The appeal stands allowed accordingly. Both parties are at liberty to place additional' documents before the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III. R.P.

Appear allowed:

Text of the official Supreme Court Reports (S.C.R.) edition, extracted from the court’s PDF. Page headers and margin letters have been removed; a stray one may remain inside a paragraph. For citing, rely on the official PDF.