https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95342 Where Rule 57P did not itself prescribe any limitation period, the Tribunal treated the question whether the Section 11A limitation could be imported into the money credit scheme as a substantial question of law. Relying on the Supreme Court's view that the then existing Rule 57-I contained no limitation, it held that the absence of direct High Court or Supreme Court authority on Rule 57P made the issue fit for reference. The matter was therefore referred to the jurisdictional High Court for opinion on the limitation issue. en-us Wed, 20 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Dec 2011 13:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95342 Where Rule 57P did not itself prescribe any limitation period, the Tribunal treated the question whether the Section 11A limitation could be imported into the money credit scheme as a substantial question of law. Relying on the Supreme Court's view that the then existing Rule 57-I contained no limitation, it held that the absence of direct High Court or Supreme Court authority on Rule 57P made the issue fit for reference. The matter was therefore referred to the jurisdictional High Court for opinion on the limitation issue. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 20 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95342