2009 (10) TMI 705

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....their plea of limitation was not considered in the said final order. According to the application, the ex-parte order passed by this Bench has to be recalled and the appeal re-heard. This application also seeks to re-agitate the issues involved in the appeal. The learned Consultant has reiterated the averments continued and the contentions raised in this application. The learned S.D.R. submits that any plea of limitation was not raised by the party before any of the lower authorities and hence cannot be allowed to be entertained at this stage. According to him, there is no mistake in the final order. 2. As there was no representation for the appellant despite notice, and as they had not requested for adjournment of hearing, the appeal wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tral Excise Rules, 1944, did not invoke the extended period of limitation by alleging suppression of facts or any other ingredient of the provision for extended period of limitation. The credit in question was taken on 2-3-2000 and the show-cause notice was issued on 4-4-2001, beyond one year (normal period). In the absence of allegations of the above kind, the extended period of limitation was not applicable. The learned Consultant has reiterated this case of the appellant, and the learned S.D.R. has opposed the plea by submitting that the plea was not raised before. At this stage, the learned Consultant fairly concedes that any plea of limitation was not raised before the original authority or before the first appellate authority. He, how....