Allowed

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

Bombay HC18 Jan 2016NMA/947/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction, in a Notice of Motion regarding an appeal, condoned a significant delay of over seven years, accepted the merits of the appeal, and directed the matter to be proceeded with, acting on the assurance that winding up proceedings were set aside.

What did the court decide?

The Notice of Motion to condone delay and allow the appeal is made absolute. No order as to costs.

Aafloat Textiles India Limited (Formerly… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

17-NMA947-15.DOC

¶2

Shephali

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 947 OF 2015

¶4

IN

¶5

CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL (L) NO. 42 OF 2015

¶6

Aafloat Textiles India Ltd. …Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of Central Excise and
Customs Vapi…Respondent

¶7

Mr. Prakash Shah, with Mr. Jas Sanghavi, i/b M/s. PDS Legal, for
the Applicant/Appellant.
Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly, i/b Mr. A.S. Rao,for the Respondents.

¶8

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

¶9

PC:-

¶10

1.The delay of 2703 days' occurred because the Applicants
were facing proceedings, firstly under the Sick Industrial
Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. Upon an opinion of the
Board under that Act, the Petitioner faced winding up proceedings.
The Petitioner continued to be in winding up until a recent order
passed by one of us (Mr. G. S. Patel, J.) setting it aside. That is the
period that is consumed and taken and details of all proceedings are
set out. There is no reason therefore to disbelieve any of the

¶11

1 of 2

¶12

17-NMA947-15.DOC

¶13

statements made in the Affidavit in Support, particularly in
paragraph 4.

¶14

2.In view of the same and the Applicant deserving a chance to
satisfy this Court on the merits of the Appeal, that we condone this
enormous delay.

¶15

3.The Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer
clause (a). There will be no order as to costs.

¶16

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶17

(S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶18

2 of 2

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

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.)

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

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