Limitation plea and CENVAT credit dispute sent back for fresh adjudication, with merits left open on remand.

The CESTAT, Ahmedabad held that the matter should be remanded to the original adjudicating authority because the plea of limitation had not been contested before the lower authorities. The dispute concerning entitlement to CENVAT credit on MS angles, channels, plates and similar items was not finally decided at this stage, and the appellant's merits arguments were kept open. The impugned order was therefore set aside, and the adjudicating authority was directed to consider limitation as well as the appellant's submissions on merits on remand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the matter should be remanded to the original adjudicating authority for consideration of the plea of limitation.

Analysis: The plea of limitation had not been contested before the authorities below. The dispute on entitlement to CENVAT credit on MS angles, channels, plates, etc. was not finally adjudicated in this order, and the appellant's merits contentions were left open for consideration on remand.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority to consider limitation, along with the appellant's submissions on merits.

---