Search: condonation of delay

2 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 9(1)(vii)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

9 STC 747 and that cannot be treated as a vested legal right. Correction of judicial error does not amount to deprivation of vested/substantive rights, even though a person may be deprived of an unwarranted advantage he had under the overruled decision. In cases, where the burden is not passed on, there is no prejudice; he can always

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