- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- 8 May 2009
- Bench
- Arijit Pasayat, Asok Kumar Ganguly
- Case no.
- Civii Appeal No. 5389 of 2007
- Result
- Appeal dismissed.
Headnote
Cenfral Excise Act, 1944 - s. 35-G - Condonation of delay in filing appeal under - Power of - Held: High Court has no power to condone the delay.
Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise, Naida v. Punjab Fibres Ltd., Noida 2008 (3) SCC 73; Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise v. Mis. Hoga India (P) Ltd. and Anr. 2009 (4) SCALE 37 4, relied on.
Headnote as published in the Digital Supreme Court Reports by the Supreme Court of India. Paragraph references point to the judgment below.
Judgment
DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. In this appeal the only question that arises for consideration is whether there is power for condonation of delay in filing an appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (in short the 'Act'). By judgment delivered in Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise, Noicja v. Punjab Fibres Ltd., Naida (2008 (3) SCC 73) it was helq that the High Court has no power to condone delay in seeking reference under Section 35-H of the Act. Doubting correctness of the view reference was made to larger Bench. By judgment dated 27.3.2009 a three-judge Bench in Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise ~: Mis. Hongo India (P) Ltd. & Anr. 2009 (4) SCALE 374 concurred with the view t~ken by the two-judge Bench in Punjab Fibres case (supra). The decision has full application to the present case also.
¶2That being so this appeal deserves to be dismissed which we direct. No costs.
Case details
Arising from
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5389 of 2007.
From the Judgment & Order dated 27.07.2007 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Central Excise Appeal No. 23 (D) of 2005.
Appearances
Pankaj Bhatia, Vivek Choudhary and Jainendra Maldahiyar (T. Mahipal) for the Appellants.
Navin Prakash (8.V. Balaram Das) for the Respondents.
Source: Supreme Court of India, Digital Supreme Court Reports, via the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open dataset (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.