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.

Krishna Couriers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Krishna Couriers vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Apr 12, 2007
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/45319

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 Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Service Tax

Case Summary

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

Service Tax

Key legal issue
Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Krishna Couriers

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In
(2008)(223)ELT92Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. heard both sides. there is a delay of eight months in filing this appeal. the reason assigned is that the order copy received by the employee was not placed before the assessee and the employee has left the services. the assessee sworn to the effect that he received the copy of the order just one week before filing this appeal, hence the delay. the delay has been satisfactorily explained and the circumstances were beyond the control of the assessee. hence the delay is condoned. list the stay application in its turn.

Full Judgment

1. Heard both sides. There is a delay of eight months in filing this appeal. The reason assigned is that the order copy received by the employee was not placed before the assessee and the employee has left the services. The assessee sworn to the effect that he received the copy of the order just one week before filing this appeal, hence the delay. The delay has been satisfactorily explained and the circumstances were beyond the control of the assessee. Hence the delay is condoned. List the stay application in its turn.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial