Collector of Central Excise Vs. Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd.

Collector of Central Excise vs Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Feb 26, 1992

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/6981

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/6981
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On: Feb 26, 1992
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Collector of Central Excise

Respondent

Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In: (1993)(63)ELT639TriDel

Excerpt

1. the learned jdr has not produced the collector's authorisation/or the proceedings in which the authorisation was taken from the collector for filing this appeal despite a number of opportunities i.e.31-12-1991 and 21-1-1992.2. prima facie, the authorisation dated 30-3-1983 of shri s.mukhopadhyay, collector of central excise, calcutta is not a proper authorisation - being of general nature. following the ratio of tribunal's judgments : the appeal is liable to be dismissed prima facie, as contended by the learned advocate for the respondents.3. having considered the facts and circumstances of this case on the aforesaid preliminary point, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. we order accordingly.

Full Judgment

1. The learned JDR has not produced the Collector's authorisation/or the proceedings in which the authorisation was taken from the Collector for filing this appeal despite a number of opportunities i.e.

31-12-1991 and 21-1-1992.

2. Prima facie, the authorisation dated 30-3-1983 of Shri S.Mukhopadhyay, Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta is not a proper authorisation - being of general nature. Following the ratio of Tribunal's judgments : The appeal is liable to be dismissed prima facie, as contended by the learned advocate for the respondents.

3. Having considered the facts and circumstances of this case on the aforesaid preliminary point, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. We order accordingly.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Collector of Central Excise vs Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd. Same Subject Excise