High CourtsDivision Bench

Hero Honda Motors Ltd. vs Cestat, New Delhi

Delhi High Court · Decided on 2 August 2011 · Citation: (2012) 281 ELT 483

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dipak Misra, C.J · Sanjiv Khanna, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226, 227
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 5467 of 2011 (On Appeal from 2011 (273) E.L.T. 89 (Tri. - Del.) ) and CM No''s. 11150 of 2011 (Exemption) and 11149 of 2011
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

17 paragraphs · 310 words

CM. No. 11150/2011 (Exemption)

1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM stands disposed of.

WP (C) No. 5467/2011 and CM No. 11149/2011 (Stay)

2.

Heard Mr. S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel and Mr. Mukesh Anand, learned Standing counsel for Central Excise.

3.

Invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the order passed by the Customs Excise and

Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) on 17th June, 2011 in Excise Appeal No. 3575/2010[2011 (273) E.L.T. 89 (Tribunal)] is called in

question. It is submitted by Mr. S. Ganesh that the appellant was not afforded an opportunity to argue the appeal inasmuch as the matter was

heard on the question of stay on 18th March, 2011. Learned counsel has invited our attention to notice, cause list and the orders.

4.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we do not intend to advert to the said stand and stance canvassed by Mr. S. Ganesh, learned

senior counsel, we are inclined to permit the petitioner to file an application for review/recall/modification that they were not granted any

opportunity to put forth contentions for the purpose of adjudication of the appeal on merits. This is an aspect which has to be gone into by the

Tribunal.

5.

In view of the aforesaid, we grant liberty to the petitioner to file an application for review/modification/recall of the order dated 17-6-2011 on

the said ground and we request the Tribunal to look into the same with utmost objectivity.

6.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of without any order as to cost.

7.

Needless to emphasize, when we have granted such a liberty, we have not adverted to the merits of the order that has been impugned. The

application for review/recall/modification be filed within two weeks from today. Order dasti under the signature of the Court Master.