2012 (5) TMI 595

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2.The respondents sought time to file reply to the writ petition. 3.It appears from the facts of the case and argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that on 19^thDecember, 2011, the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise and Service Tax, Ranchi passed the order rejecting the petitioner's application under Section 35F of the Central Excise....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....emand for entertaining the appeal preferred by the petitioner. It further appears that when said order was set aside and when the said authority was directed to give opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner, the said appellate authority became wise and rejected the application of the writ petitioner for dispensing with from pre-deposit of the amount for maintaining the appeal. 4.Without co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n of India Vs. Jesus Sales Corporation Ltd., reported in 1996 (83) ELT 486 (S.C.) and issue relating to pre-hearing for deciding such application is subjudiced before this Court in another writ petition. Therefore, at this stage, there is no need to any more comment. 5.However, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that said judgment was not cited by him nor it was cited by any represent....