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

P.C.JAIN, ARCHANA WADHWA
Collector of Central Excise, Patna – Appellant
Versus
Waxpol Industries Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.N. Ghosh

ORDER

Per Shri P.C. Jain: There is a Condonation of Delay Application from the Revenue inasmuch as communication of the impugned order was made on 29.2.88 and the Appeal was filed by the Revenue on 31.5.88. Learned JDR, Shri S.N. Ghosh appearing for the Appellant Collector submits that 29.5.88 was Sunday. Therefore, the Appeal could be filed only on 30.5.88. There is thus a delay of one day.

2. We have heard learned JDR. and having regard to the period of delay and overall facts and circumstances of the case, we allow the Application and condone the delay of one day. Thereafter, we have proceeded to hear and dispose of the Appeal.

3. Question involved in this Appeal is whether grinding of calcined bauxite and of calcined china clay would amount to a process of manufacture involving a duty liability on powdered calcined bauxite and powdered calcined china clay. Learned JDR has drawn our attention to Grounds of Appeal (Ground No.2) wherein it has been stated that the initial form of calcined bauxite and calcined china clay in which they were obtained by the Respondents herein were lumps of bauxite and lumps of china clay.

They were totally useless and the lumps as such could not be used

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