TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (12) TMI 459
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unsel, for the Respondent. [Order per : Harsha Devani, J. (Oral)]. - Considering the controversy involved in the present case which lies in a very narrow compass, the matter is taken up for hearing today. 2. Rule. Mr. Kalpesh N. Shastri, learned Standing Counsel waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent. 3. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tral Excise and Customs, Rajkot rejected all the applications for condonation of delay. 5. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench at Ahmedabad, [the Tribunal] being Appeal No. E-793/2009. Vide order dated 1st December 2009, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner and directed the Commiss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hen the matter was taken up for hearing, on behalf of the respondent it was submitted that in view of the fact that against the order of the Tribunal, the revenue has preferred a tax appeal before this Court being Tax Appeal No. 975 of 2010, which is still pending, the applications made by the petitioner have not been decided. The Court had, therefore, vide order dated 1st December 2010, directed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....viated in the present case, as the appeal preferred by the revenue has been heard and decided and as such the respondent has no cause or reason for not complying with the order of the Tribunal. The respondent is, therefore, duty bound to comply with the directions issued by the Tribunal. Moreover, as rightly pointed out by the learned advocate for the petitioner, delay in deciding such application....