Shanti Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of C. Ex.

Andhra Pradesh High Court 20 Dec 1998 Writ Petition No''s. 23204, 23581 and 23687 of 1998 (1998) 12 AP CK 0006
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Writ Petition No''s. 23204, 23581 and 23687 of 1998

Hon'ble Bench

P. Venkatarama Reddi, Acting C.J.; Bilal Nazki, J

Advocates

Duba V. Nagarjuna Babu, for the Appellant; B. Adinarayana Rao, S.C. for Central Govt., for the Respondent

Final Decision

Dismissed

Acts Referred
  • Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 - Section 35(1)

Judgement Text

Translate:

@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER

P. Venkatarama Reddi, Actg. C.J.

1. We cannot say that the Tribunal has committed any illegality in dismissing the appeal filed against the order of the appellate authority refusing to condone the delay and to entertain the appeal. In view of the specific provision contained in the proviso to Section 35(1) of the Central Excise Act, the condonation of delay beyond the period of 90 days does not arise. The ratio of the decision in G. Satyanarayana Reddy v. State of A.P. sought to be relied upon by the appellant''s counsel has no application as the provision with which the Division Bench was concerned in the said case was materially different and there was no embargo against entertainment of appeal after a particular time-limit. In this view of the matter, we dismiss the writ petitions at the admission stage subject to the direction that the disputed duty shall not be collected for a period of six weeks.

From The Blog
Allahabad High Court Quashes Lucknow Residency Rule for E-Rickshaw Registration, Calls It Arbitrary and Unconstitutional
Dec
02
2025

Court News

Allahabad High Court Quashes Lucknow Residency Rule for E-Rickshaw Registration, Calls It Arbitrary and Unconstitutional
Read More
NRI Property Buying in India: Legal Rules, Tax Challenges, and Sale Issues Explained
Dec
02
2025

Court News

NRI Property Buying in India: Legal Rules, Tax Challenges, and Sale Issues Explained
Read More