Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.18 seconds)State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Venkataramana Chuduva & Muramura ... on 27 July, 1984
8.
In the memo of petition a contention was raised that the order
passed by the CESTAT, Commissioner (Appeals) and Joint Commissioner
are ex facie perverse, illegal and wholly incorrect in law and
therefore, the same are liable to be set aside. It is further
contended that the order passed by the CESTAT dismissing the appeal
on the technical grounds of limitation had resulted in failure of
justice inasmuch as by doing so the CESTAT has made the petitioner as
victim of law on account of changing legal position. Technicalities
of law cannot prevent any Court from doing substantial justice. It
is further contended that there was sufficient cause and CESTAT ought
to have condoned the delay. Reliance was also placed on the decision
of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of State of Andhra
Pradesh Vs. Venkataramana Chuduva & Muraura Merch,
reported in (1986) 159 ITR 59, wherein the decision of
the Sales Tax Tribunal was upheld and the Tribunal condoned the delay
of more than one year on the ground that the subsequent decision of
the Honourable Supreme Court constituted sufficient cause for not
filing an appeal.
Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985
1