9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (9) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Respondent. ORDER The following questions said to be of law as arise from Order ED(MAS) 323/83, dated 22-3-84 of this Bench have been raised for being referred to the High Court in terms of Section 35G of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. 1. Whether the provisions of Rule 56A (3)(i)(c) of Central Excise Rules as amended by the Rule 173(K) ibid is mandatory or is only direct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant s contention is that it is merely directory whereas the Senior Departmental Representative s contention is that it is mandatory and that only the Central Government is empowered to relax the requirement. We do not think it is necessary for us to pronounce a verdict on the question whether the requirement is directory or mandatory. Hence, the first question does not arise for reference f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was in this context that the Tribunal had to consider whether non-observance of the provisions of Rule 56A(3) would or would not disentitle the applicant/appellant to the benefit of the concession. On this point, the Tribunal has found, In the present case, as we have observed, there had been admittedly delay and the remains unexplained. What, in effect, the appellants want us to do is to ign ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a notification issued under Rule 8(1) subject to certain conditions, a condition has not been fulfilled. Ordinarily the question as to whether the provision or non-provision of the nature referred to in the question raised will hardly be of relevance. In this view of the matter, we find that the question does not survive for reference. 6. Accordingly, the application for reference to High Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
