Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 4]

Kerala High Court

M/S.I B Infotech Enterprises (P) Ltd vs Additional Commissioner Of Central ... on 14 August, 2007

Author: T.R.Ramachandran Nair

Bench: T.R.Ramachandran Nair

       

  

  

 
 
                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                             PRESENT:

                    THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

                TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/13TH BHADRA 1934

                                    WP(C).No. 20492 of 2012 (J)
                                       ---------------------------

PETITIONER :
--------------------

             M/S.I B INFOTECH ENTERPRISES (P) LTD.
             (FORMERLY INDIAN BEVERAGES LTD), KARIMKULAM
             ELAVANCHERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT
             REPRESENTED BY VASANTHAKUMARAN, DIRECTOR.

             BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
                          SMT.MEERA V.MENON
                          SRI.MAHESH V.MENON

RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------

          1. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS
              C.R.BUILDINGS, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673 001.

          2. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE
              CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX (APPEALS), C.R.BUILDINGS
              I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018.

          3. CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
              SOUTH ZONE BENCH, BANGALORE- 560 030.

              BY ADVS. SRI.TOJAN J.VATHIKULAM,SC, C.B. EXCISE
                           SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL, SC, CB EX


            THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
            ON 04-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Mn

                                                                           ...2/-

WP(C).No. 20492 of 2012 (J)



                                 APPENDIX

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

      P1-    COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 14-8-2007.

      P2-    COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 9-5-2011.

      P3-    COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD
             RESPONDENT DATED 3-10-2011.

      P4-    COPY OF DISPENSING PETITIONER FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED
             8-10-2011

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :       NIL

                                                               //TRUE COPY//



                                                              P.S. TO JUDGE

Mn



                 T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
         --------------------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C)No.20492 Of 2012
         --------------------------------------------------
        DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2012

                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner seeks for a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on the appeal Exhibit P3 as well as Exhibit P4 petition within a time frame.

2. Going by the averments in the Writ Petition, the challenge was initially against Exhibit P1 order, which was confirmed as per Exhibit P2 order by the 2nd respondent and now the petitioner has taken up the matter before the 3rd respondent in the form of an appeal.

3. In Exhibit P4, the petitioner seeks for a direction to the respondents to pass an interim order to dispense with the deposit of the duty payable and penalty during the pendency of the appeal. It is submitted that Exhibits P3 and P4 have been filed as early as in October,2011 and the appeal and the petition have not been taken up for hearing so far.

4. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Department, who submitted that coercive proceedings have not W.P.(C)No.20492/12 -2- been initiated so far.

The Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions.

(i) The 3rd respondent will expedite the hearing of the appeal. The petition, namely, Exhibit P4 will be considered after hearing the petitioner, within a period of two months from today.
(ii) Steps, if any, for implementing the orders will be kept in abeyance till orders are passed on Exhibit P4.

Sd/-(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) dsn