Search: condonation of delay

2 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 10(26)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE,TIRUCHIRAPALLI vs. M/S. DALMIA CEMENT (BHARAT) LTD

C.A. No.-003600-003600 - 2006Supreme Court02 Sept 2015

10) It is a nine Judge Bench decision. Majority opinion was delivered by B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J. for himself and on behalf of four other Judges. K.S. Paripoornan, J. and S.C.Sen, J. wrote their separate opinions. Hansaria, J. agreed with the conclusions and reasoning of Paripoornan, J. However, insofar as issue at hand is concerned, they concurred with the majority

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI vs. M/S. NEBULAE HEALTH CARE LTD

C.A. No.-002789-002789 - 2007Supreme Court27 Oct 2015

Section 11A

Delay condoned. 2) These appeals raise an issue of eligibility of concession/exemption from excise duty that is provided under Notification nos. 8/1999, 8/2000, 8/2001, 8/2002 and 8/2003 to the Small Scale Industrial Units (for short, 'SSI Units'). It is not in dispute that the respondents – assessees in these appeals fulfill eligibility conditions for availing the benefit of SSI exemption under