https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166776 A reference under Section 35G(1) was held not maintainable where the Tribunal's order, though disposing of the appeal on limitation and procedure, had in substance considered the applicability of exemption notifications and a question relating to the rate of duty. In that situation, the proper remedy lay in appeal under Section 35L(b), not reference. The application for condonation of delay also failed because the explanation was vague, lacked particulars about the inter-ministerial process, and did not establish sufficient cause. The delay was therefore not condoned, and the reference application was rejected on both maintainability and limitation grounds. en-us Mon, 29 Aug 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Nov 2014 16:27:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166776 A reference under Section 35G(1) was held not maintainable where the Tribunal's order, though disposing of the appeal on limitation and procedure, had in substance considered the applicability of exemption notifications and a question relating to the rate of duty. In that situation, the proper remedy lay in appeal under Section 35L(b), not reference. The application for condonation of delay also failed because the explanation was vague, lacked particulars about the inter-ministerial process, and did not establish sufficient cause. The delay was therefore not condoned, and the reference application was rejected on both maintainability and limitation grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 29 Aug 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166776