9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as originally filed as Special Civil Application Stamp No. 1099 of 2000. However, there were certain office objections which were not removed. It appears that the office was not able to trace out the papers and ultimately by order dated 15-4-2004 this Court had permitted the petitioner to reconstruct the record of the said Special Civil Application. That is how the record of the petition has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the eligibility of the petitioner in so far as the aforesaid parameters are concerned. However, the Assistant Collector rejected the declaration dated 30-12-1998 only on the ground that the controversy raised by the petitioner was already concluded by a decision of the Apex Court and since the decisions of the Apex Court are binding under Article 141 of the Constitution, no dispute remained or s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aration and the adjudication was made after 3l-3-1998, the requirements of the provisions of Sections 87 and 88 of the Act are satisfied and the declarant would be entitled to claim the benefit of the KVSS. It appears that the department carried the matter in appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, SLP Nos. 10051-10059 of 2000 came to be dismissed on 18-8-2001 [2002 (146) E.L.T. A 321 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-II is accordingly quashed and set aside. Since the order rejecting the declaration is held to be illegal, the time as mentioned in Section ……? of the Act shall begin to run from the date of receipt of this order. The petition is accordingly allowed with a further direction that any amount paid after filing of the declaration shall be subject to adj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
