Appellant filed Central Excise Appeal. Counsel sought withdrawal on ground of non-maintainability under Section 35G of the Act. Court dismissed appeal as withdrawn.
Appeal dismissed as withdrawn.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
6-2-CEXA-218-17.doc
Sharayu Khot .
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 218 OF 2017
Century Enka Limited …Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of Central Excise …Respondent
Mr. Prakash Shah a/w Ms. Divyasha Mathur a/w Mr. Viraj Bhate, i/by PDS Legal, for the Appellant.
Ms. P.S. Cardozo, for the Respondent.
CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.
DATE : 19 September 2018
ORDER :
1. Shri. Shah, the learned Counsel for the Appellant, on
instructions seeks to withdraw this Appeal, as the same is not
maintainable under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
Hence, dismissed as withdrawn.
[RIYAZ I. CHAGLA J.] [M.S. SANKLECHA, J.]
1 / 1
September 19, 2018
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Century Enka Limited
The Commissioner of Central Excise
M.S. SANKLECHA
RIYAZ I. CHAGLA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
