9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Ajit Bharihoke (Oral): Vide this order we propose to dispose of two applications for condonation of delay of one year seven months in filing of appeals by the Department against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) dated 29.3.2010 whereby he accepted the appeals respectively filed by M/s Laxmi Oils & Vanapati P. Ltd. and Shri Saurabh Gupta, Director of the said company. 2. The cause show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Hon ble Supreme Court. It is further alleged that subsequently in the matter of CCE, Jallandhar vs. A.G. Flats Ltd., the Tribunal vide final order No. 648-661 of 2011-EX dated 25/7/11 and also reported in 2012 (277) E.L.T. 96 (Tri. Del.) took the view that dismissal of civil appeals In-Limine by the Hon ble Supreme Court without adverting to the facts and without giving reasons could not be t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . amounted to laying down of law. 4. Notice issued to the respondent at his correct address have been received back undelivered with the report that he is not available on the given address. From the service report it appears that the respondent is avoiding service, thus, we have proceeded ex parte. 5. We have considered the submissions made by Shri Nagesh Pathak, learned A.R. for the appellant. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ause in a subsequent judgment, the Tribunal has taken view that in-limine dismissal of appeal by the Supreme Court does not lay down any law. 6. In view of the discussion above, we do not find merit in the applications for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the applications are dismissed. Excise Appeal No.2990-2991 of 2011 In view of dismissal of applications for condonation of delay the appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
