JUDGMENT :

R.D. DHANUKA, J.

1. The Division Bench of this Court at Mumbai by its order dated 2nd November, 2018 passed in this appeal found it difficult to reconcile the conflict of views of this Court in APM Terminals India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Navi Mumbai and Another, 2019 (21) G.S.T.L. 26 in Central Excise Appeal No. 124 of 2017 delivered on 6th September, 2018 and the judgment delivered by Division Bench of this Court in case of Facor Steels Ltd. vs. Commissioner, 2015 (320) E.L.T. 357 (Bom.) and formulated two questions for consideration by Larger Bench, which Larger Bench is accordingly constituted pursuant to the Administrative Order passed by the learned Chief Justice in view of the said order dated 6th September, 2018. The Division Bench has referred following questions of law to the Full Bench:

(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the issue of a demand being time barred when it is made on the basis of valuation and/or rate of duty, is an issue relating to the assessment of goods and, therefore, an appeal under Section 35G of the Act, is not maintainable before this Court?

(ii) Whether an appeal under Section 35G(1) of the