Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Central Excise

        1992 (7) TMI 170 - AT - Central Excise

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal Directs Appeal to Collector of Central Excise The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable before it and should be presented before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). It declined to ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Tribunal Directs Appeal to Collector of Central Excise

                          The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable before it and should be presented before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). It declined to make an observation on excluding time spent in prosecuting the appeal before the Tribunal, leaving this decision to the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). The appeal and stay petition were returned to the appellants for presentation before the appropriate authority.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
                          2. Applicability of Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963.
                          3. Exclusion of time spent in prosecuting the appeal before the Tribunal for computing the limitation period.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal:
                          The primary issue raised was whether the appeal was maintainable before the Tribunal. The Junior Departmental Representative argued that the impugned order was passed by the Deputy Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta-1 Collectorate, and therefore, the appeal should lie with the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) and not the Tribunal. The learned Advocate for the appellants conceded this point, acknowledging that the appeal was filed before the Tribunal by inadvertence.

                          2. Applicability of Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963:
                          The appellants contended that they were entitled to the benefit of Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963, read with Section 29 of the Act, which allows for the exclusion of time spent in prosecuting a case in good faith in a court that lacks jurisdiction. The appellants cited several judgments to support their claim, including:
                          - V.P. Misra and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow and Others.
                          - Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. v. Madan Lal Das & Sons.
                          - Mangu Ram v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi.
                          - Anjan Choudhury v. Anandaneer Co-operative Registered Housing Society and Others.

                          The Tribunal noted that under Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, the time spent in prosecuting the appeal before the wrong forum could be excluded if the proceedings were prosecuted with due diligence and good faith. However, the determination of good faith and due diligence is a matter for the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) to decide.

                          3. Exclusion of Time Spent in Prosecuting the Appeal Before the Tribunal:
                          The appellants requested that the Tribunal make an observation that the period spent in prosecuting the appeal before the Tribunal should be excluded when computing the limitation period for filing the appeal before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). The Tribunal, however, declined to make such an observation, stating that it falls within the jurisdiction of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) to decide whether the appellants are entitled to the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act.

                          The Tribunal referenced several judgments to support this position, including:
                          - The Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. v. Madan Lal Das & Sons, which held that the time taken in prosecuting an appeal before the wrong forum should be excluded for the purpose of limitation.
                          - The Supreme Court's decision in Hukumdev Narain Yadav v. Lalit Narain Mishra, which discussed the applicability of the Limitation Act to special laws.

                          The Tribunal concluded that it is not within its purview to make an observation regarding the exclusion of time spent before it, as this is a matter for the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) to decide. The appeal and the stay petition were returned to the appellants for presentation before the proper forum.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal determined that the appeal was not maintainable before it and should be presented before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). It declined to make an observation regarding the exclusion of time spent in prosecuting the appeal before the Tribunal, leaving this determination to the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). The appeal and stay petition were returned to the appellants for presentation before the appropriate authority.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found