CEA No.54 of 2010(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CEA No.54 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision:29.03.2010 M/s Gulab Dyeing ....Appellant Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. Present: Mr.Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate, for the appellant. **** ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J. (ORAL) Notice of motion. On asking of the Court, Mr.HPS Ghuman, Senior Standing Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. This order shall dispose of CEA Nos.54 to 85 of 2010 (32 cases), as common questions of law and facts arise in these appeals. However, the facts have been extracted from CEA No.54 of 2010. The order impugned in the present appeal is dated 11- 12.11.2009 passed by the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, which has upheld the order passed by the adjudicating authority and has held that the appellant is not entitled to the benefit of Exemption Notification. This very order was also the subject matter of challenge in CEA No.10 of 2010, in which this Court has held that the present appeals are not maintainable under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act (for short “the CEA No.54 of 2010(O&M) 2 Act”) and in fact, the remedy available to the appellant would be to file an appeal before the Supreme Court under Clause (b) of Section 35L of the Act. In view of the above, the aforementioned appeals are decided in the same terms as in CEA No.10 of 2010 titled as M/s PVM Enterprises (P) LTD. Versus Commissioner Central Excise, Ludhiana and, accordingly, the Registry is directed to return these appeals to the assessee to avail their appropriate remedy under law. (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE March 29, 2010 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) seema JUDGE