OF 2004 Commissioner of Customs Import, Mumbai M/s.Vardhaman Acrylic Ltd., Mumbai v. Vardhaman Acrylic Ltd. of to the on file of the Tribunal
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Reference is disposed of accordingly. (R.M. LODHA, J.) LODHA, J.) (R.M. (R.M. LODHA, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR,J.) DEVADHAR,J.) (J.P. (J.P. DEVADHAR,J.)
Judgment
Tribunal. P.C.
v. He submits that the appeal may be remanded back for consideration of the appeal on merits.
In submission made learned counsel assessee-respondents, necessary question referred 2 Tribunal opinion. As candidly conceded counsel assessee, 23rd January 2002 passed Tribunal restore appeal no.C/313/01-Mum, Commissioner Customs, Mumbai (Import) v. Vardhaman Acrylic Ltd. Tribunal hearing decision merits treating review application before Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 129D of the Customs Act, 1962 within limitation.
Reference is disposed of accordingly. (R.M. LODHA, J.) LODHA, J.) (R.M. (R.M. LODHA, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR,J.) DEVADHAR,J.) (J.P.
(J.P. DEVADHAR,J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.