Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. Indus Paper

Commissioner of Central Excise, vs indus Paper

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Sep 13, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/25666

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/25666
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Sep 13, 2001
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

indus Paper

Excerpt

1. the tribunal had dismissed the reference application filed by the commissioner on 30.9.1999 arising out of its order communicated to him on 25.6.98 as being barred by limitation. this application prays for restoring the reference application.2. the ground in the application appears to be that in a similar mater where the commissioner filed a combined application for rectification of the tribunal's order and the reference application, the tribunal directed filing of the reference application and subsequently allowed.that is not correct. the tribunal dismissed what it perceived to be an application for rectification of mistake leaving it to the commissioner to file if he chose, an application for reference. this is what the tribunal has done in the present case too. the tribunal treated the application filed by the department purporting to be for rectification of mistake or a reference application, containing no questions of law for reference as an application for rectification of mistake. the order of the tribunal dismissing the application on limitation is perfectly correct and does not require modification.

Full Judgment

1. The Tribunal had dismissed the reference application filed by the Commissioner on 30.9.1999 arising out of its order communicated to him on 25.6.98 as being barred by limitation. This application prays for restoring the reference application.

2. The ground in the application appears to be that in a similar mater where the Commissioner filed a combined application for rectification of the Tribunal's order and the reference application, the Tribunal directed filing of the reference application and subsequently allowed.

That is not correct. The Tribunal dismissed what it perceived to be an application for rectification of mistake leaving it to the Commissioner to file if he chose, an application for reference. This is what the Tribunal has done in the present case too. The Tribunal treated the application filed by the department purporting to be for rectification of mistake or a reference application, containing no questions of law for reference as an application for rectification of mistake. The order of the Tribunal dismissing the application on limitation is perfectly correct and does not require modification.

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