https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92473 The reference application was treated as timely because limitation was counted from the date of receipt shown on the departmental copy of the order. An omission to mention key chains in one part of the earlier order was treated as inadvertent, as the appeal, departmental arguments, and the order read as a whole covered both PVC pouches and key chains. The Tribunal also held that the merits objections did not justify refusing reference and that the question required consideration by the High Court, so the reference was directed to be made accordingly. en-us Wed, 22 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Nov 2011 18:07:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92473 The reference application was treated as timely because limitation was counted from the date of receipt shown on the departmental copy of the order. An omission to mention key chains in one part of the earlier order was treated as inadvertent, as the appeal, departmental arguments, and the order read as a whole covered both PVC pouches and key chains. The Tribunal also held that the merits objections did not justify refusing reference and that the question required consideration by the High Court, so the reference was directed to be made accordingly. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92473