2004 (3) TMI 459

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. -  In this appeal, filed by M/s. Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Healthcare Limited, the issue involved is regarding rabate of Central Excise duty paid by them on the goods exported out of India. 2. We heard Sh. B.L. Narasimhan, learned Advocate for the appellants and Sh. Kumar Santosh, learned SDR for the Revenue. As per the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... itted that the appeal was filed by them within time in February, 2003 and as they were pursuing their appeal with the Appellate Tribunal, this period may not be counted for the purpose of filing the revision application before the Central Government under Section 35EE of the Act. There is considerable force in the pleading made by the learned Advocate. The Central Government may consider the fact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X