SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

K.L.REKHI, V.T.RAGHAVACHARI
Rajasthan Worsted Spinning Mills – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.K. Rana,Vineet Ohri

ORDER

K.L. Rekhi, Member (T)

1. The appellants filed a refund claim on 1-12-78, some 20 months after the payment of duty. The Assistant Collector rejected it on merits as well as on the ground of time bar (of 6 months) under the erstwhile Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The appellants received the Assistant Collector's order on 29-3-80. Under the then Section 35 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, the appellants could file an appeal to the Appellate Collector within three months. The appellants, however, filed the appeal late on 25-9-80. The Appellate Collector rejected it as being out of time. Aggrieved by this order, the appellants filed a revision application before the Central Government which, on transfer to this Tribunal, is now before us as the subject appeal.

2. During the hearing before us, the appellants pressed for only one point : that their subject application to the Central Government was for revision of the Assistant Collector's order and not for revision of the Appellate Collector's order. They stated that under Section 36(1) of the Act, revision before the Central Government could be filed against any decision or order passed under the Act or the Rul

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top