9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioners had filed applications on 11-10-2006 in the order passed in the year 2002, i.e. after six months and hence applications are barred by limitation. Held that- We are of the opinion that the approach adopted by the Tribunal is highly deprecated. When the petitioners' case is claimed to be covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court or even by the Circular issued by the department, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Excise Rectification of Mistake Application No. 31 to 87 of 2006 in Excise Appeal No. 4453 to 4459 of 1993. 3. This Court has issued notice on 9-2-2010 for final disposal of the petition. 4. Heard Mr. D.V. Parikh, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Gaurang H. Bhatt, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue. 5. The short issue involved in this petition is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , this Court has recorded the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners that there was an error in the order passed by the Tribunal as the issue was covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Supreme Washers (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune, 2003 (151) E.L.T. 14 (S.C.). This Court has also recorded the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court. 7. The above order of this Court was very much available with the Tribunal. Without considering the above aspect, the Tribunal has adopted a shortcut and rejected the Ratification of Mistake Application only on the ground of limitation. We are of the opinion that the approach adopted by the Tribunal is highly deprecated. When the petitioners' case is claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
