AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Desai, J.—Having considered portions of the judgment appealed from which deal with both the basis of denial of relief (Seepage 229 of the Paper Book) and the contention whether dross and skimming''s can be regarded in any view of the matter as goods manufactured by the company, we find ourselves in concurrence with both the approach as well as the ultimate conclusion of the trial Court. In this view of the matter, the Appeal to stand summarily dismissed.
We may add that this Appeal filed in 1980 by the Union of India has now been brought up for admission. It is true that there is a duty of the office to place these matters for admission in due course and not after five years, but, it is obvious that it is equally the duty of the appellants if there is a mistake on the part of the Office to ensure that the Appeal is brought up for admission. In any case we wish to make it clear that although this delay is a factor to be taken into account, it is not the factor on account of which the Appeal is directed to be dismissed. The reasons for dismissa4 are our acceptance of the discussion as well as the ultimate conclusion of the learned Writ Judge.