The Principal Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S. Oil Country Tubluar PVT LTD.
Facts
The Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, GST Bhavan, Hyderabad (appellant) filed an appeal against the order of the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT had set aside an order-in-original passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Hyderabad-III. The appellant contended that the CESTAT's order was passed in contravention of a circular dated 24.03.2021, which mandates pronouncement of judgment within six months of the conclusion of hearing. The hearing concluded on 29.08.2023, and the order was passed on 08.04.2024, exceeding the stipulated period by approximately eight months. The respondent-assessee produced communication from the Tribunal indicating extensions were sought and granted, though the final order was still delayed.
Held
The Court held that the impugned order passed by the CESTAT was in contravention of both the Circular dated 24.03.2021 and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anil Rai vs. State of Bihar. The circular mandates pronouncement within six months of the conclusion of hearing, and if not pronounced within this period, the matter is deemed not heard and requires relisting after obtaining permission from the President, CESTAT. In this case, the hearing concluded on 29.08.2023, and the order was passed on 08.04.2024, exceeding eight months. Although extensions were sought and granted, the final order was still passed beyond the extended period. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside. The matter was remitted to the CESTAT for fresh consideration on priority basis, preferably within three months, and to decide afresh without being influenced by the set-aside order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order passed by the CESTAT is liable to be set aside on the ground that it was pronounced beyond the period stipulated in the Circular dated 24.03.2021, thereby contravening its provisions? 2. Whether the impugned order is liable to be set aside on the ground that it was pronounced beyond the period stipulated in the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anil Rai vs. State of Bihar, which mandates relisting for fresh hearing after obtaining prior order from the Hon'ble President, CESTAT, if the order is not delivered within six months? Contentions of the Appellant (Principal Commissioner of Central Tax): The impugned order is in contravention of the Circular dated 24.03.2021, which specifies a six-month period for pronouncement of judgment from the conclusion of hearing. The order was passed after eight months, thus violating the circular. Contentions of the Respondent (M/s. Oil Country Tubular Pvt Ltd): The respondent submitted communication from the Tribunal showing that extensions for passing the order were sought and granted. However, the final order was still passed beyond the extended period.
Sections Cited
Section 35G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNE AY,THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST '- TWOTHOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HoNouRABLE sRl lusride suoDALA cHALAPATHI RAo Appeal filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act' 1944 as substituted by the Finance Act, 2003 against the Order dated 08-04-2024 passed inFinalorderNo.N3o273.3o277t2O24in[CentralExciseAppealNo.E/25925 /2013] on the file of the CuStomS, Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Regional Bench, Hyderabad preferred against the Order dated 24'12-2012 passed in Order-in-Original No. 3Ot2O12 - CE- HYD- lll Adjn (Commr') on the file of the Commissioner of Customs, Central Exercise & Service Tax' Hyderabad-lll'
Between: The Principal Commissioner of Central.Tax' GST Bhavan H No l-98/7/43 VlP Hills' jri"ni'"i'i".[url, uroi,rp,i ivdLrabad' Telansana - 50008 1' ...APPELLANT/ ResPondent CENTRAL EXCISE APPEALS NO:1O F 2025 AND It//s. Oil Country Tubluar Pvt Ltd ' Sreepuram' Narketpelly' Nalgonda District Telangana ...RESPONDENT/ APPellant CUSTOMS Counsel for the Appellant: SRI' K' PRASIIANTH' SENIOR Standing Councsel FOR CBMNAT, BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.