TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Interpretation of Note 2(a) Dismissed Due to Lack of Substantial Question of Law; Delay Condoned in Appeals.</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida II Versus M/s. Lg Electronics India Private Limited Etc.</h3> Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida II Versus M/s. Lg Electronics India Private Limited Etc. - TMI Issues Involved: Interpretation of Note 2(a) of the General Rules of Interpretation.Summary:The Supreme Court, comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta, heard the case where the Petitioner was represented by Mr. Balbir Singh, A.S.G., Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR, Mr. Siddharthi Sinha, Adv., Mr. Manish Pushkarna, Adv., Ms. Ruknini Bobde, Adv., Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi, Adv., and the Respondent did not have representation. The Court, after considering the arguments, decided to condone the delay. It was held that no substantial question of law arises concerning the interpretation of Note 2(a) of the General Rules of Interpretation, as contended by the revenue. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
