Department's excise appeal against CESTAT final order was dismissed as withdrawn after counsel stated the demand fell below the monetary threshold for pursuing appeals; no costs awarded.
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.
2024:MHC:3818
C.M.A.No.1521 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.11.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G. ARUL MURUGAN
C.M.A.No.1521 of 2010
The Commissioner of Central Excise Central Excise Commissionerate, No.1, Williams Road, Cantonment, Tiruchirappalli – 620 001.
.. Appellant
vs
Shri.A.Sekhar .. Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against final order No.1892 of 2009 dated 08.12.2009 on the file of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai.
For Appellant :: Mr.A.P.Srinivas Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent :: No appearance
C.M.A.No.1521 of 2010
DR. ANITA SUMANTH.,J. and G. ARUL MURUGAN.,J.
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by Dr. ANITA SUMANTH.,J)
Though the respondent is served and the description printed in the
cause list, none appears by or his behalf
[A.S.M., J] [G.A.M., J] 11.11.2024
sl Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes speaking order
C.M.A.No.1521 of 2010
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Central Excise Commissionerate, Tiruchirappalli
Shri.A.Sekhar
Anita Sumanth
G. Arul Murugan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
