Richardson and Cruddas Vs. Cce

Richardson and Cruddas vs Cce

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Mar 27, 1998

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/13190

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/13190
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: U Bhat, S T K.
Decided On: Mar 27, 1998
Subject: MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue: MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Richardson and Cruddas

Respondent

Cce

Legal References

Reported In: (1998)(77)LC54Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. appellant is a government of india undertaking and as per directions of the supreme court in o.n.g.c. case as clarified in 1990 (70) elt 45 (sc) : 1995 (58) ecr 241 (sc)is required to move the committee of secretaries for clearance. when the appeal came up for hearing on 29.9.1997 we made this aspect clear and adjourned the appeal to 30.12.1997 indicating that the appeal would be liable to be dismissed for want of the requirement of clearance. on 30.12.1997 the appellant was absent and the appeal was adjourned to today. notice of hearing has been issued to the appellant. appellant is absent and there is no representation. appellant has not cared to inform the tribunal whether committee of secretaries has been moved in the matter. in these circumstances we dismiss the appeal for default, with liberty to seek restoration after moving the committee for clearance and its deliberations are over.

Full Judgment

1. Appellant is a Government of India Undertaking and as per directions of the Supreme Court in O.N.G.C. case as clarified in 1990 (70) ELT 45 (SC) : 1995 (58) ECR 241 (SC)is required to move the Committee of Secretaries for clearance. When the appeal came up for hearing on 29.9.1997 we made this aspect clear and adjourned the appeal to 30.12.1997 indicating that the appeal would be liable to be dismissed for want of the requirement of clearance. On 30.12.1997 the appellant was absent and the appeal was adjourned to today. Notice of hearing has been issued to the appellant. Appellant is absent and there is no representation. Appellant has not cared to inform the Tribunal whether Committee of Secretaries has been moved in the matter. In these circumstances we dismiss the appeal for default, with liberty to seek restoration after moving the Committee for clearance and its deliberations are over.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Richardson and Cruddas vs Cce Same Subject MRTP Same Judge U Bhat, S T K.

MRTP supreme court Has been