High CourtsDivision Bench(2012) 05 CAL CK 0034

Commissioner of C. Ex., Kolkata-II vs Super Forging and Steels Ltd.

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 2 May 2012 · Citation: (2012) 281 ELT 481 : (2012) 28 STR 554

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J · Asim Kr. Mondal, J
CASE NUMBER
CEXA No. 18 of 2005 and GA No''s. 3903 and 3902 of 2005

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 202 words
1.

We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. We have gone through the statements and averments made in the petition as well as averment made in the opposition. We find that delay has been sufficiently explained and the explanation given by the department has not been controverter and cannot be controverter. It is a common knowledge that department is to act with the help of the officials who are not always diligent as no individual interest is involved. Therefore, the application for condonation of delay is allowed. Accordingly, the delay is condoned. However, this order will be effective subject to payment of cost assessed at 100 GMs to be paid by the appellant to the learned Advocate-on-record of the respondent. This payment shall be made within a period of fortnight from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. It is made clear that this matter will appear in the list one week hence for admission hearing. If the cost is not paid as directed above then appropriate order shall be passed by this Court.

2.

The application is disposed of. All parties are to act on a Photostat signed copy of this order on the usual undertakings.