Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Blast Carboblocks

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Blast Carboblocks

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Oct 06, 2000

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/19354

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/19354
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Oct 06, 2000
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Respondent

Blast Carboblocks

Legal References

Reported In: (2001)(127)ELT136Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. this appeal was filed on 14-6-1993 by the revenue. the copy of the order-in-original was not filed therewith. notice was sent on 13-6-2000. show cause notices were sent on 6-7-2000 and 16-8-2000, directing the appellant commissioner to file, the required papers and cautioning him that in the absence of compliance, the appeal may be dismissed. today when the case was called out there was no compliance.the appeal is therefore liable for dismissal.2. we further find that the copy of the authorisation of the commissioner under section 35b of the central excise act, is not filed by the revenue at all. the copies of the impugned order in one set are in distinct and in another set plain sheets have been filed. it appears that in the appellant commissioner's office appeals to the tribunal are considered as low priority.3. this appeal is dismissed in terms of rule 11 of the cegat (procedure) rules, 1982.4. the copy of the order to be marked to the chief commissioner, central excise, mumbai.

Full Judgment

1. This appeal was filed on 14-6-1993 by the revenue. The copy of the Order-in-Original was not filed therewith. Notice was sent on 13-6-2000. Show cause notices were sent on 6-7-2000 and 16-8-2000, directing the appellant Commissioner to file, the required papers and cautioning him that in the absence of compliance, the appeal may be dismissed. Today when the case was called out there was no compliance.

The appeal is therefore liable for dismissal.

2. We further find that the copy of the authorisation of the Commissioner under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, is not filed by the Revenue at all. The copies of the impugned order in one set are in distinct and in another set plain sheets have been filed. It appears that in the appellant Commissioner's office appeals to the Tribunal are considered as low priority.

3. This appeal is dismissed in terms of Rule 11 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982.

4. The copy of the order to be marked to the Chief Commissioner, Central Excise, Mumbai.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs Blast Carboblocks Same Subject Excise