1980 (8) TMI 95

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppeal was rejected on the short question of time bar without going into the merits of the case. The question to be decided by the Government therefore is whether the time bar was correctly applied in this case or not. 3. This is a case in which the petitioner on receipt of the impugned order of the Assistant Collector approached the authority concerned for issue of an appealable order whereupon .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... not being a case where the appellate authority had passed any order-in-appeal, the Government referred the petitioner's revision application to the Collector of Central Excise, Indore as he was competent to entertain the revision application within the meaning of section 35A of the Central Excises and Salt Act and also informed the petitioners accordingly. The petitioner's contention is that they .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the Asstt. Collector as contained in his letter dated 8-12-78 should be excluded for purposes - of computing the time limit for section 35 of the Central Excise and Salt Act. 4. Government see considerable force in the petitioner's contention that the delay in the filing of their appeal had largely occurred due to the wrong advice given to them by the Assistant Collector. Government consider .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X