2013 (1) TMI 755

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r. 2. Shri P. Prasad, learned counsel for the respondents on advance copy. 3. Heard on the question of admission. 4. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the interlocutory orders dated 7-8-2012 and 20-11-2012 passed by the second respondent. 5. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, passing of the aforesaid .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Section 32-I of the Central Excise Act, the orders passed by the second respondent Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission cannot be said to be illegal or without jurisdiction. 8. In the circumstances, no case for interference is made out to interfere into the aforesaid impugned interlocutory orders. However, it is made clear that after taking the final decision in the matter by the se .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X