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

1985 Supreme(All) 232

B.N.SAPRU, V.K.KHANNA
HARI FERTILISERS – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


B. N. SAPRU, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed against the order of the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals ). Four appeals are pending against the orders of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Varanasi in which stay applications were filed. The Collector rejected all the stay applications except one which has been allowed in part. Under the proviso to Section 35f, the appellate authority may grant stay if the demand levied would cause undue hardship to the person appealing. The collector should pass a speaking order taking into account this aspect of the matter. He may also consider whether any part of the demand is prima facie barred by time before passing appropriate orders. With these obseivation the writ petition is dismissed.


.

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