Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Mahesh Textiles Private Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Mahesh Textiles Private Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jun 07, 2004

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/35526

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/35526
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: S T S.S., T Anjaneyulu
Decided On: Jun 07, 2004
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

Mahesh Textiles Private Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In: (2004)(170)ELT484Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

2. the collector of central excise (appeals), bombay, had disposed off thirty-five appeals by common order dated 3 nov. 1993. aggrieved by the same, the deputy commissioner central excise, mumbai-iii has filed (one appeal) e/371/94 before this tribunal. the tribunal by its order dated 19-9-2000 dismissed the said appeal at the preliminary stage holding that the department has failed to prefer other 34 appeals as envisaged under rule 11 of the cegat (procedure) rules. in view of the aforesaid situation, the department has subsequently filed other 34 appeals along with condonation of delay petitions. it is the contention of the department that filing of these appeals are formal in nature as issue to be decided in all the appeals is one and the same. therefore it is prayed to condone the delay.3. the ld. advocate appearing for the assessee could not negate the contention of the department on any valid grounds.4. having considered the observation made by this tribunal in the earlier appeal which is not dismissed on merits but on technicality for not filing these 34 appeals and further having regard to the contention raised by the department, which is justified one, the delay is hereby condoned. register the appeal and list on 28-6-2004.

Full Judgment

2. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, had disposed off thirty-five appeals by common order dated 3 Nov. 1993. Aggrieved by the same, the Deputy Commissioner Central Excise, Mumbai-III has filed (one Appeal) E/371/94 before this Tribunal. The Tribunal by its order dated 19-9-2000 dismissed the said appeal at the preliminary stage holding that the department has failed to prefer other 34 appeals as envisaged under Rule 11 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules. In view of the aforesaid situation, the department has subsequently filed other 34 appeals along with condonation of delay petitions. It is the contention of the department that filing of these appeals are formal in nature as issue to be decided in all the appeals is one and the same. Therefore it is prayed to condone the delay.

3. The ld. advocate appearing for the assessee could not negate the contention of the department on any valid grounds.

4. Having considered the observation made by this Tribunal in the earlier appeal which is not dismissed on merits but on technicality for not filing these 34 appeals and further having regard to the contention raised by the department, which is justified one, the delay is hereby condoned. Register the appeal and list on 28-6-2004.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs Mahesh Textiles Private Ltd. Same Subject Excise Same Judge S T S.S., T Anjaneyulu

Excise Deputy Commissioner Having regard to Re form In all