TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal Rejected: Court Confirms No Delay Extensions Beyond 30 Days Under Central Excise Act's Special Law Provisions.</h1> <h3>MR TOBACCO PVT. LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA</h3> MR TOBACCO PVT. LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA - 2004 (178) E.L.T. 137 (Del.) Issues Involved:1. Classification of Pan Masala (Gutkha) for excise duty purposes.2. Condonation of delay in filing an appeal u/s 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944.3. Applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to appeals under the Central Excise Act, 1944.Summary:1. Classification of Pan Masala (Gutkha):The petitioner, engaged in the manufacture of Pan Masala (Gutkha), initially classified the product under sub-heading No. 2404.49 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, paying 16% basic excise duty and 24% special excise duty. Following a letter from the Central Excise Department, the petitioner reclassified the product under heading No. 24.04. A show cause notice was issued contending that for the period prior to 28-2-2001, the goods were classifiable under heading 2106.00, and duty was demanded accordingly. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise confirmed this demand in Order-in-Original No. 61/2002, dated 17-5-2002.2. Condonation of Delay in Filing an Appeal:The petitioner filed an appeal against the Order-in-Original on 28-7-2002, which was 94 days after the receipt of the order. Section 35(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, prescribes a 60-day period for filing an appeal, extendable by a further 30 days if sufficient cause is shown. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal, stating that he had no power to condone a delay beyond 30 days.3. Applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963:The petitioner argued that the Commissioner (Appeals) had the power to condone delays beyond 30 days under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, read with Section 29(2). However, the court held that the Central Excise Act, 1944, being a special law, expressly excludes the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act beyond the 30-day period specified in Section 35(1). The court referred to the case of M/s. Delta Impex v. Commissioner Customs, which held that taxing authorities are not 'courts' and thus Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply.The court also considered various Supreme Court decisions, including Lalji Haridas v. State of Maharashtra, Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Madan Lal Das and Sons, and Union of India v. Popular Construction Company, to conclude that the provisions of the Limitation Act are excluded by the specific provisions of the Central Excise Act.Conclusion:The court upheld the decisions of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal, stating that the Commissioner (Appeals) had no power to condone delays beyond the further period of 30 days from the expiry of the initial 60-day period. The writ petition was dismissed.
TaxTMI 