9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (3) TMI 204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ral Excise, Calcutta-11 is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 32/Calcutta-II/91 dated 20-2-1991 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Calcutta in terms of which the latter had allowed the appeal filed before him by M/s. Hindustan Motors Limited, respondents herein, holding that the demand issued to them for recovery of Modvat credit was hit by time bar as per the provisions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A. Choudhury, learned Departmental Representative appeared for the appellant Collector. He adopted the reasoning contained in the appeal and pleaded that the appeal be allowed. 4. Shri J.P. Khaitan, learned Advocate appeared for the respondents. He contended that the appeal is not maintainable. The Collector (Appeals) had allowed their appeal on the ground that the demand was hit by limitation. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decisions, the appeal can be examined only to see if the same is maintainable on the ground stated by the Collector while authorising the appeal. As the Collector (Appeals) had allowed their appeal on the ground that the demand issued to them was hit by time bar in view of the provisions of Rule 57-1 and Section 11A, which ground had been taken by them before the original authority, namely, the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wal) was that while the authorisation of the Collector was confined to only one ground relating to natural justice stating that if there was violation of natural justice, according to the Collector (Appeals) he could have remanded the cases for de novo adjudication after observing the principles of natural justice instead of straightaway accepting the appeals, the Assistant Collector, in his appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
