Disposed

Ms. Arjandas Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commissioner of Central Excise

Bombay HC18 Jan 2016NMA/1326/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Notice of Motion hearing where the High Court, noting the appellant's financial difficulties cited in a subsequent affidavit, granted time to deposit a balance sum in monthly installments for continued stay of dismissal, subject to two default consequences.

What did the court decide?

Time till 31st December 2016 to deposit the balance sum in equal monthly instalments.

Ms. Arjandas Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs the… — Customs and Excise | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

24-NMA1326-15.DOC

¶2

Shephali

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1326 OF 2015

¶4

IN

¶5

CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 169 2014

¶6

Ms. Arjandas Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd.…Appellant
Versus

¶7

The Commissioner of Central Excise…Respondent

¶8

Mr.Vikram Nankani, Senior Advocate, a/w Mr. Jitendra
Motwani, i/b M/s. Economic Laws Practice,for the
Applicant/Appellant.

¶9

Mr. Neelesh V. Kalantri,for the Respondents.

¶10

CORAM:S.C. DHARMADHIKARI &
G.S. PATEL, JJ.
DATED:18th January 2016

¶11

PC:-

¶12

1.Having heard both sides and finding that the Applicant has
placed a further Affidavit pointing out the financial difficulties post
the order passed by this Court as well, that in these peculiar
circumstances and without this order being treated as a precedent,
we grant time till 31st December 2016 to deposit the balance sum,
which should be deposited in equal monthly instalments, the first
commencing from 25th January 2016. Any two defaults shall result
in all consequences following in law. No further applications of the

¶13

1 of 2

¶14

24-NMA1326-15.DOC

¶15

present nature shall be entertained. If the amount as directed above
is paid and proof of deposit is produced, the Tribunal shall decide
the Appeal in accordance with law.

¶16

2.This order is passed because in paragraph 5 of the Affidavit
in Support, it is stated that the Applicant which is a Private Limited
Company has made a payment of Rs. 30 Lakhs on 23rd July 2015
but unable to make the further payment as pointed out in the
Additional Affidavit of the Managing Director of the Applicant,
aged 87 years.

¶17

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶18

(S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶19

2 of 2

Ms. Arjandas Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commissioner of Central Excise

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms. Arjandas Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commissioner of Central Excise

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Jaya Santosh Andher and 3 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Bank of Baroda Vs Sawant Fertilizers and Chemicals and 6 Ors.

M/S. Kalyani Exporters Vs Induslnd Bank and 12 Ors.

The Commissioner of Customs (General) Vs M/S. Kunverji Darshi and Sons, (Now Known as Srinivas Clearing and Shipping (I) Pvt. Ltd.)

Aafloat Textiles India Limited (Formerly Known as Akai Impex Ltd.) Vs the Commissioner Central Excise and Customs Vapi

Bnp Paribas L1 Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International TAXATION)-1(3) (1) and Another