SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(SC) 1027

ARIJIT PASAYAT, ASOK KUMAR GANGULY
Chaudharana Steels (P) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: For the Appellants:Pankaj Bhatia, Vivek Choudhary, Jainendra Maldahiyar (for T. Mahipal), Advocates For the Respondents:Navin Prakash (for B. V. Balaram Das), Advocate.

Judgment :

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J.

1. In this appeal the only question that arises for consideration is whether there is power for condonation of delay in filing an appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (in short the `Act). By judgment delivered in Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise, Noida v. Punjab Fibres Ltd., Noida (2008 (3) SCC 73) it was held that the High Court has no power to condone delay in seeking reference under Section 35-H of the Act. Doubting correctness of the view reference was made to larger Bench. By judgment dated 27.3.2009 a three-judge Bench in Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise v. M/s. Hongo India (P) Ltd. & Anr. 2009 (4) SCALE 374 concurred with the view taken by the two-judge Bench in Punjab Fibres case (supra). The decision has full application to the present case also.

2. That being so this appeal deserves to be dismissed which we direct. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top