Mark Auto Industries Ltd. Vs. Cce

Mark Auto Industries Ltd. vs Cce

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Sep 04, 2000

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/19068

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/19068
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: K Sreedharan, N T C.N.B.
Decided On: Sep 04, 2000
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

Mark Auto Industries Ltd.

Respondent

Cce

Legal References

Reported In: (2000)(72)ECC110

Excerpt

1. in this cod application the prayer is for condonation of dealy caused in filing the appeal before this tribunal. neither the appellant nor the department has a case that the appeal filed before this tribunal is barred by limitation. therefore, this cod application as ill conceived. the attempt of the learned counsel, appearing for the appellant is to make out a case that appeal before the lower appellate authority was not barred by limitation as was held by that authority.in substantiating this argument a petition of this nature is unwarranted. the petition is dismissed.2. learned departmental representative is directed to make available the records evidencing the delivery of order passed by the adjudicating authority on the assessee, the appellant herein.3. learned dr may also get details regarding the action taken by the department on receipt of original letter dated 3.5.99 stated to have been sent by the appellant praying for a copy of the adjudication order to the deputy/asstt. commissioner of central excise, division-i, urban estate, gurgaon. adjourned to 15th september, 2000. stay application will come up on that date.

Full Judgment

1. In this COD application the prayer is for condonation of dealy caused in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. Neither the appellant nor the Department has a case that the appeal filed before this Tribunal is barred by limitation. Therefore, this COD application as ill conceived. The attempt of the learned Counsel, appearing for the appellant is to make out a case that appeal before the lower appellate authority was not barred by limitation as was held by that authority.

In substantiating this argument a petition of this nature is unwarranted. The petition is dismissed.

2. Learned Departmental Representative is directed to make available the records evidencing the delivery of order passed by the adjudicating authority on the assessee, the appellant herein.

3. Learned DR may also get details regarding the action taken by the Department on receipt of original letter dated 3.5.99 stated to have been sent by the appellant praying for a copy of the adjudication order to the Deputy/Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise, Division-I, Urban Estate, Gurgaon. Adjourned to 15th September, 2000. Stay application will come up on that date.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Mark Auto Industries Ltd. vs Cce Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge K Sreedharan, N T C.N.B.