Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (9) TMI 1412 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

2015 (9) TMI 1412 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT - 2016 (334) E.L.T. 394 (Cal.) - Time limit for pronouncement of judgments - Held that:- The hearing of the appeal before the CESTAT was concluded on 29th October, 2014 and the judgment was delivered on 11th May, 2015. Thus, there was a delay of more than six months in delivering the impugned judgement. Hence, it was in breach of the CESTATís Order No.4 of 2009. Therefore, the order under challenge cannot be sustained and is set aside and quashed. Hence, t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the learned advocate for the respondent be kept on record. Heard Mr. Tanmoy Chakraborty, learned advocate for the appellant and Mr. Saraf, learned advocate for the respondent. The appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law: Whether the delay of more than six months in passing the order impugned dated 11th May, 2015 by the CESTAT after conclusion of hearing on 29th October, 2014 renders the order non est and unsustainable in view of the CESTAT Order No.4 of 2009 dated 17th Ju .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

CESTAT Order No.4 of 2009 was framed pursuant to the directions passed by the Supreme Court in Anil Rai vs. State of Bihar : 2009 (233) CLT 13 SC and as admittedly hearing of the matter was concluded on 29th October, 2014 by CESTAT and the impugned judgement was delivered on 11th May, 2015, that is after more than six months, which was in breach of the time limit prescribed for delivering judgments in said CESTAT Order, impugned order under challenge may be set aside and appropriate order may be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

vs. State of Bihar [supra] and other judgments of the various High Courts, CESTAT had passed an order prescribing a time limit for pronouncement of judgments. The relevant portions of the said order are set out hereinbelow: 3. If no order is delivered and pronounced within two months from the day of conclusion of the arguments in a matter, then such order shall be delivered and pronounced within next [two months] subject, however, that prior consent in writing for the same shall be obtained fro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version