https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152183 A limitation plea based on the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was treated as involving mixed questions of fact and law because the foundational facts had not been raised before the lower authorities. As a result, the plea could not be entertained for the first time before the Tribunal, and the substantive limitation challenge remained not maintainable at that stage. However, the omission to deal with a ground earlier permitted by amendment of the appeal memo was a rectifiable error, so the rectification application succeeded only to amend the final order to record the limitation issue. en-us Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Jun 2013 11:50:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152183 A limitation plea based on the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was treated as involving mixed questions of fact and law because the foundational facts had not been raised before the lower authorities. As a result, the plea could not be entertained for the first time before the Tribunal, and the substantive limitation challenge remained not maintainable at that stage. However, the omission to deal with a ground earlier permitted by amendment of the appeal memo was a rectifiable error, so the rectification application succeeded only to amend the final order to record the limitation issue. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152183