TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 1207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Section 107 of the Act. The Central Goods and Services Act is a special statute and a self-contained code by itself. Section 107 of the Act has an inbuilt mechanism and has impliedly excluded the application of the Limitation Act. It is trite law that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 will apply only if it is extended to the special statute. Section 107 of the Act specifically provides for the limitation and in the absence of any clause condoning the delay by showing sufficient cause after the prescribed period, there is complete exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Accordingly, one cannot apply Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to the aforesaid provision. Thus, no interference is required in this petition and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity's order as the application of Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to Section 107 of the Act. 5. The Supreme Court in Singh Enterprises v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur and Others reported in (2008) 3 SCC 70 , while dealing with a similar issue as in the present case, has held as under: 8. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) as also the Tribunal being creatures of statute are not vested with jurisdiction to condone the delay beyond the permissible period provided under the statute. The period up to which the prayer for condonation can be accepted is statutorily provided. It was submitted that the logic of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (in short the Limitation Act ) can be availed for condonat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is useful to refer to a recent decision of this Court in Punjab Fibres Ltd. [(2008) 3 SCC 73] The Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise, Noida was the appellant in this case. While considering the very same question, namely, whether the High Court has power to condone the delay in presentation of the reference under Section 35-H(1) of the Act, the two-Judge Bench taking note of the said provision and the other related provisions following Singh Enterprises v. CCE [(2008) 3 SCC 70] concluded that: (Punjab Fibres Ltd. case [(2008) 3 SCC 73] , SCC p. 75, para 8) 8. the High Court was justified in holding that there was no power for condonation of delay in filing reference application. 32. As pointed out earlier, the language us ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
