Ram Kirpal Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Ram Kirpal vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Jun 25, 1998

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/13714

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/13714
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On: Jun 25, 1998
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

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

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ram Kirpal

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In: (1998)(104)ELT671TriDel

Excerpt

1. the application for restoration of the appeal has been filed on the ground that the case was adjourned to 28-5-1998 but listed on 24-4-1998 and dismissed for default in appearance.2. we have heard learned dr. he fairly leaves the matter of restoration of application for decision by the bench, we have perused the court diary and are satisfied with the explanation offered by the appellants' counsel. we, therefore, recall the order of dismissal and restore the appeal to its original number.3. the learned counsel states that a reference application on the issue as to whether poppy seeds can be termed as "diabetic food" has been referred by the tribunal to the gujarat high court where the matter was taken up but adjourned to the first week of august, 1998 and they request that the appeal may be fixed for hearing keeping this in view on any date after high court takes up the matter in august.4. the learned sdr explains the urgency of the hearing of this matter.keeping the request of both the sides in mind, we fix this appeal for hearing on 27-8-1998.

Full Judgment

1. The application for restoration of the appeal has been filed on the ground that the case was adjourned to 28-5-1998 but listed on 24-4-1998 and dismissed for default in appearance.

2. We have heard learned DR. He fairly leaves the matter of restoration of application for decision by the Bench, we have perused the Court diary and are satisfied with the explanation offered by the appellants' Counsel. We, therefore, recall the order of dismissal and restore the appeal to its original number.

3. The learned Counsel states that a reference application on the issue as to whether poppy seeds can be termed as "Diabetic Food" has been referred by the Tribunal to the Gujarat High Court where the matter was taken up but adjourned to the first week of August, 1998 and they request that the appeal may be fixed for hearing keeping this in view on any date after High Court takes up the matter in August.

4. The learned SDR explains the urgency of the hearing of this matter.

Keeping the request of both the sides in mind, we fix this appeal for hearing on 27-8-1998.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Ram Kirpal vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Service Tax