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

K.S.DILIPSINHJI
Collector of Central Excise, Bombay-II – Appellant
Versus
Garware Paints Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N.K. Pattekar,G.R. Divekar

ORDER

K.S. Dilipsinhji, Member (T)

1. The Collector of Central Excise, Bombay-II, has authorised the Deputy Collector to file the present appeal against the Order No. C-859/BII-192/83 dated 19.4.83 of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, under which the Collector (Appeals) gave the benefit of Rule 56-A concession to the extent of Rs. 2922.69 to M/s. Garware Paints Ltd. Since the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay-II, received the order of the Collector (Appeals) on 21.4.83 and the appeal on his behalf was filed in the Registry on 30.7.83, there was a delay of 9 days which required condonation before the appeal could be taken up on merits. Accordingly, the Departmental Representative was asked to state what reasons the appellant had in favour of the request for condonation of the appeal, which request was contained in the Deputy Collector's letter addressed to the Registry. The Departmental Representative was also informed as to why no application in proper form was filed for condoning the delay. The Departmental Representative agreed with my views regarding the procedural lapse but made an oral request for condoning the delay on grounds of consultation 'with concerned

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