Limitation not challenged in appeal meant merits were academic, and the appellate forum declined to examine excisability.

Limitation was the decisive issue, and the adjudicating authority had already rejected the department's case on that ground in favour of the assessee. The appeal memo did not effectively challenge that limitation finding, so the appellate forum treated the point as unassailed. In those circumstances, any examination of excisability on merits would have been purely academic, and the appeal was rejected. The stated principle is that where the decisive limitation issue is not contested in appeal, the appellate authority need not go into the merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand was barred by limitation and, if so, whether the appeal could succeed on merits.

Analysis: The only live issue decided was limitation. The order-in-original had already rejected the department's case on limitation, and the appeal memo did not effectively contest that finding. Since the limitation issue had been decided in favour of the assessee, any examination of excisability on merits would be merely academic.

Conclusion: The finding on limitation was sustained in favour of the assessee, and the appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the decisive issue of limitation is not assailed in appeal, the appellate forum need not examine the merits, as such examination would be academic.

---