TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 773X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in Ambica Industries versus Commissioner of Central Excise [2007 (5) TMI 21 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. Appeal not maintainable. - CEAC 47/2005 - - - Dated:- 10-12-2014 - Sanjiv Khanna And Jayant Nath,JJ. For the Petitioner : Dr. Ashwani Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the Respondent : Through ORDER C.M.Nos.8782/2013 and 8781/2013 This appeal filed by the Revenue was d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der was passed at Mumbai. Learned counsel for the appellant will obtain instructions in this regard. 2. In spite of the aforesaid order, the applicant Revenue had not been able to obtain instructions. We had on the last date of hearing i.e. 2nd December, 2014, recorded as under:- Attention of the counsel for the appellant has been drawn to the order dated 5th December, 2013. It appears ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the decision of the Supreme Court in Ambica Industries versus Commissioner of Central Excise (2007) 6 SCC 769. 5. With the aforesaid observations, the applications are disposed of. It will be open to the applicant Revenue to file an appeal along with an application for condonation of delay, if so advised, before the High Court having jurisdiction. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Central Excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
