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

1992 Supreme(Cal) 163

RUMA PAL
BONGAIGAON REFINERY AND PETROCHEM. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
COLLR OF C (A) – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.Saha, J.P.KHAITAN, N.C.ROY CHAUDHARY, NILAVA MITRA, P.K.JHUNJHUNWALA, R.N.BAJORIA

RUMA PAL, J.

( 1 ) THE question involved in this Writ Petition is whether the Appellate Authority had properly exercised its discretion under Section 35f of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, in rejecting the petitioner's application for dispensing with the deposit as a pre-condition to the petitioner's preferring an appeal.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is a Government of India Undertaking and a manufacturer of Petroleum, Petrochemical and Petrochemical based products. The admitted facts are that the petitioner has a large area covering 3. 926 square kilometers encircled by a boundary wall at Dhaligaon. With this area the petitioner has a refinery as well as other units producing, inter alia, Xylene and Polyester Staple Fibre.

( 3 ) THE subject matter of the petitioner's appeal is a Notification under which the petitioner claims exemption. That Notification which is Notification No. 28/89-C. E. , dated 1-3-1989 reads as follows :"exemption to goods other than blended or compounded lubricating oils and greases - In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of section 5a of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), the Central Government, being satisfied that it i





























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