Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Vishva Vishal Engineering Ltd.

Commissioner of C. Ex. vs Vishva Vishal Engineering Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Dec 02, 2005

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/40980

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/40980
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: S Kang, Vice-, N T C.N.B.
Decided On: Dec 02, 2005
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of C. Ex.

Respondent

Vishva Vishal Engineering Ltd.

Excerpt

1. the revenue filed this application for rectification of mistake in the final order. the revenue has not filed a detailed affidavit explaining the delay. the contention is that necessary affidavit filed on 19-4-2005 and the same was not taken into consideration. now, the revenue filed copy of that affidavit. we have gone through the affidavit as per the details given in the affidavit, the impugned order received in the office of commissioner of central excise on 21-1-2004 and the same was accepted by the commissioner on 3-3-2004. thereafter the chief commissioner of central excise vide order dated 5-7-04 directed to file the appeal against the impugned order. we find in spite of direction on 5-7-04, the appeal was filed on 7-12-04 further we find that under the provision of central excise act, the chief commissioner has no power to issue such direction. in these circumstances, we find that as the delay in filing the appeal was not sufficiently explained by the revenue, therefore, we find no mistake in the order whereby the appeal was dismissed as time-barred. the rom application is rejected.

Full Judgment

1. The Revenue filed this application for rectification of mistake in the Final Order. The Revenue has not filed a detailed affidavit explaining the delay. The contention is that necessary affidavit filed on 19-4-2005 and the same was not taken into consideration. Now, the Revenue filed copy of that affidavit. We have gone through the affidavit as per the details given in the affidavit, the impugned order received in the office of Commissioner of Central Excise on 21-1-2004 and the same was accepted by the Commissioner on 3-3-2004. Thereafter the Chief Commissioner of Central Excise vide order dated 5-7-04 directed to file the appeal against the impugned order. We find in spite of direction on 5-7-04, the appeal was filed on 7-12-04 further we find that under the provision of Central Excise Act, the Chief Commissioner has no power to issue such direction. In these circumstances, we find that as the delay in filing the appeal was not sufficiently explained by the Revenue, therefore, we find no mistake in the order whereby the appeal was dismissed as time-barred. The ROM application is rejected.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Commissioner of C. Ex. vs Vishva Vishal Engineering Ltd. Same Subject Excise Same Judge S Kang, Vice-, N T C.N.B.