9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (4) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) on 7-6-1990. 2. The three defences raised on behalf of the first respondent are considered t below :- First it is contended that the order sought to be implemented has been appealed against and the appeal has not yet been decided by the Supreme Court. For that reason, the writ petition is said to be premature. The mere filing of an appeal even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts have not given effect to the decision sought to be implemented by this writ petition is enough of an answer to the untenability of the argument put forth on behalf of the respondent No. 1. If the filing of a writ petition has not deterred the respondents on sticking on to the illegal recovery made by them, petitioner's approach to the CEGAT under Rule 41 would not have effected better results ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
