2000 (1) TMI 55

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... shri G.M. Chaphekar, sr. counsel instructed by SS Samvatsar, Masani, SM Kolhi with Sanjay Kolhi, AM Mathor, sr. counsel instructed by B. Pandya, AP Patankar, Ashutosh Upadhyay, have been heard for petitioners. Shri BG Neema, standing counsel for Union of India and other respondents have been heard in context with the record of writ petitions. 3.All these petitions are being heard at this stage b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... als Soaps Inds. v. UOI reported in 1999 (84) ECR 300 (Delhi). The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Bhopal has rejected the applications preferred by all the petitioners for stay/waiver in view of provisions of S.35F of the Act. The Commissioner placed reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India v. Jesus Sales Corporation reported in 1996 (83) E.L.T. 486 (S. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... does not appear to be so. Therefore, the orders which are being assailed by these petitions can not be upheld as judicial verdicts resulting in rejecting the prayer made by the petitioners for stay/waiver in view of provisions of S. 35F of the Act. 7.In the interest of justice and for maintaining a clean stream of justice all these orders will have to be set aside and all the matters will have .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X