https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40817 Applicability of Rule 9 or Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 had to be determined before denying relief, because the departmental action depended on whether the goods were removed contrary to Rule 9 or involved a short levy under Rule 10. The record also did not clearly establish that the statutory appeal was out of time, since the papers suggested timely posting but misdirection through another office. In these circumstances, the dismissal of the appeal could not stand on an uncertain limitation issue alone, and the appellate authority was directed to restore the appeal and decide it on merits. en-us Wed, 22 Nov 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 May 2010 10:53:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40817 Applicability of Rule 9 or Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 had to be determined before denying relief, because the departmental action depended on whether the goods were removed contrary to Rule 9 or involved a short levy under Rule 10. The record also did not clearly establish that the statutory appeal was out of time, since the papers suggested timely posting but misdirection through another office. In these circumstances, the dismissal of the appeal could not stand on an uncertain limitation issue alone, and the appellate authority was directed to restore the appeal and decide it on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 Nov 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40817