Sunil Kumar Marwaha Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Sunil Kumar Marwaha vs Commissioner of Customs

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Nov 13, 2006

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/44077

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/44077
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: K Kumar
Decided On: Nov 13, 2006
Subject: Customs

Case Summary

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

Customs

Key legal issue: Customs

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sunil Kumar Marwaha

Respondent

Commissioner of Customs

Excerpt

1. heard both sides. the learned advocate appearing for the appellants submits that the appellants should be given two years for passing the regulation 8 exam from the date of the order passed by the commissioner of customs (general) mumbai instead from 8th july, 2004 as indicated in the order. his submission is that it is totally unreasonable to put such a condition of two years from the date of probate order where-as the commissioner has passed the order on 16-11-05. there is no bar in the chalr regulations in this regard. the learned jdr appearing for the revenue opposes the request of the appellant.2. perused the grounds in the appeal and heard the submissions of the learned advocate. i consider his plea reasonable and allow the appellant two years to pass the examination from the date of the order i.e. 16-11-2005 passed by commissioner of customs (general) mumbai.

Full Judgment

1. Heard both sides. The learned Advocate appearing for the Appellants submits that the appellants should be given two years for passing the Regulation 8 Exam from the date of the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (General) Mumbai instead from 8th July, 2004 as indicated in the order. His submission is that it is totally unreasonable to put such a condition of two years from the date of probate order where-as the Commissioner has passed the order on 16-11-05. There is no bar in the CHALR Regulations in this regard. The learned JDR appearing for the Revenue opposes the request of the appellant.

2. Perused the grounds in the Appeal and heard the submissions of the learned Advocate. I consider his plea reasonable and allow the appellant two years to pass the examination from the date of the order i.e. 16-11-2005 passed by Commissioner of Customs (General) Mumbai.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Sunil Kumar Marwaha vs Commissioner of Customs Same Subject Customs Same Judge K Kumar