2007 (11) TMI 535

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Appellant. Shri Sameer Chitkara, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. It is seen that the appeal was dismissed by order No. C-II/1195/WZB/2001, dt. 27-4-01 [2001 (135) E.L.T. 778 (T)]. Thereafter, the appellant filed rectification of mistake application on 28-6-01 and relied upon the Hon ble Supreme Court s decision in case of Nizam Sugar Factory Lt .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .R. 91 (Tri.-LB) and has held that the Hon ble Supreme Court decision even if rendered after the Tribunal s decision, has to be held as a binding decision declaring the law as it always was and would be a ground for re-opening the concluded proceeding and for making a fresh order, within the period permissible under law. 3. In view of the Larger Bench s decision. ROM application is maintainable. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X