The Commissioner Of Central Excise, Customs And Service Tax Vapi (Now Silvassa) Commissionerate v. M/S. Hindustan Unilever Ltd.

12-NMA.1021.2016.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1021 OF 2016 IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEALNO. 199 OF 2015 The Commissioner of Central } Excise, Customs and Service } Tax, Vapi } Appellant versus M/s. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. } Respondent Mr. A. S. Rao for the applicant.

Mr. Sachin Chitnis i/b. Ms. Padmavati Patil for the respondent.

CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & PRAKASH. D. NAIK, JJ.

DATED :- APRIL 24, 2017 P.C. :- 1.

Having heard both sides and finding that in the peculiar circumstances explained in the affidavit in support, the delay has occurred and which constitutes sufficient cause, we allow this notice of motion. Though the delay of 3002 days has occurred, it is explained in the affidavit that the same occurred only because of the advise given earlier to file the proceedings before the High Court of Gujrat. In these circumstances, the motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). There would be no order as to costs.

(PRAKASH.D.NAIK, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.) J.V.Salunke,PA