Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

R.B. Poly Sacks Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

R.B. Poly Sacks vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Nov 23, 2000
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/19831

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On
Subject
Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue
Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

R.B. Poly Sacks

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In
(2001)(127)ELT549TriDel

Excerpt

1. in this case the appellants vide stay order no. s/757/2000-nb(sm) dated 10-10-2000 of this bench were directed to make a deposit of rs. 1,38,4627- on or before 21-11-2000. the matter is listed today for reporting compliance of the direction of the pre-deposit. the aforesaid order dated 10-10-2000 was passed in the open court in the presence of shri a.l. upadhyay, advocate for the appellants.2. today when the matter is called, the appellants are not represented.i have heard shri r.c. sankhla, jdr for the respondent. the appellants have sent a communication dated 18-11-2000 in which it is requested that the stay order dated 10-10-2000 may be modified and appeal may be heard without asking for any deposit of the duty. i have considered these submissions. as already stated, the order dated 10-10-2000 for pre-deposit was made in the presence of ld. advocate of the appellants.the date of reporting compliance for pre-deposit i.e., 23-11-2000 is also known to the appellants, as the same was declared in the open court in the presence of ld. advocate for the appellants. the stay order dated 10-10-2000 is a detailed speaking order. on consideration of the submissions of the appellants, i find no grounds to waive the predeposit of the duty amount as already directed. since the appellants have not carried out the direction of the pre-deposit, their appeal is dismissed under section 35f of the central excise act, 1944.

Full Judgment

1. In this case the appellants vide Stay Order No. S/757/2000-NB(SM) dated 10-10-2000 of this Bench were directed to make a deposit of Rs. 1,38,4627- on or before 21-11-2000. The matter is listed today for reporting compliance of the direction of the pre-deposit. The aforesaid order dated 10-10-2000 was passed in the open Court in the presence of Shri A.L. Upadhyay, Advocate for the Appellants.

2. Today when the matter is called, the appellants are not represented.

I have heard Shri R.C. Sankhla, JDR for the Respondent. The appellants have sent a communication dated 18-11-2000 in which it is requested that the Stay Order dated 10-10-2000 may be modified and appeal may be heard without asking for any deposit of the duty. I have considered these submissions. As already stated, the order dated 10-10-2000 for pre-deposit was made in the presence of ld. Advocate of the appellants.

The date of reporting compliance for pre-deposit i.e., 23-11-2000 is also known to the appellants, as the same was declared in the open Court in the presence of ld. Advocate for the appellants. The Stay Order dated 10-10-2000 is a detailed speaking order. On consideration of the submissions of the appellants, I find no grounds to waive the predeposit of the duty amount as already directed. Since the appellants have not carried out the direction of the pre-deposit, their appeal is dismissed under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial