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 5]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Madras Cements Limited vs The Additional Commissioner Of Central ... on 16 July, 2014

Bench: N.Kumar, B.Manohar

                         -1-


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

         DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2014

                       PRESENT

           THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR

                         AND

          THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B. MANOHAR

         CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.21 OF 2013

BETWEEN:

M/S MADRAS CEMENTS LIMITED
REPRESENTED BY ITS
VICE PRESIDENT (ACCOUNTS & AUDIT)
SRI S VAITHIYANATHAN
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
MATHODU VILLAGE,
HOSADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 533.          ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI M N SHANKARE GOWDA, ADV. - ABSENT)

AND:

1.     THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER
       OF CENTRAL EXCISE
       BANGALORE II COMMISSIONERATE
       C.R. BUILDING,
       5TH FLOOR, QUEENS ROAD,
       BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     THE COMMISSIONER OF
       CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS-I)
       NO. 16/1, 5TH FLOOR,
       S.P.COMPLEX,
                           -2-


     LALBAGH ROAD,
     BANGALORE - 560 027               ...RESPONDENTS

                       *****
     THIS CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SEC.35G OF THE CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, ARISING OUT OF
ORDER DATED 29/05/2012 PASSED IN FINAL ORDER
NO.E/361/2010, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO:

     I.    ALLOW THE APPEAL;
     II.   SET ASIDE THE FINAL ORDER IN APPEAL
           NO.E/361/2010 DATED 29/05/2012 FOR
           THE PERIOD 01/04/2008 TO 31/07/2008.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
N. KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                   JUDGMENT

This Appeal is preferred against the order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore. There is a delay of 374 days in preferring this appeal. When the case was listed for Admission on 26.6.2014, there was no representation and therefore, the case was adjourned by two weeks. Even today, there is no representation. We do not see -3- any justification to adjourn the case. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE KNM/-