1990 (7) TMI 207 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing supplementary appeals.
2. Time-barred review applications under Section 35A of the Central Excises and Salt Act.
3. Violation of principles of natural justice in modifying price lists without notice or hearing.
4. Applicability of review application under Section 35A versus appeal under Section 35.
5. Calculation of limitation period under old Sections 35A and 36.
6. Plea for remand of the case to Assistant Collector of Central Excise.

Analysis:

1. The appellants filed a revision application against two orders-in-review and supplementary appeals for four orders-in-review. The Tribunal, following past practice, condoned the delay in filing supplementary appeals and allowed the Condonation of Delay applications.

2. The review applications filed by the appellants under Section 35A were deemed time-barred by the Additional Collector. However, the appellants argued that the applications were within the statutory time limit. The Tribunal found that the review applications were indeed filed within one year from the date of issue of the Assistant Collector's orders, thus not time-barred.

3. The appellants contended that the Assistant Collector modified price lists without notice or hearing, violating principles of natural justice and Rule 173C(7) of the Central Excise Rules. Citing relevant case law, the Tribunal found the Assistant Collector's orders to be in contravention of the rule and unsustainable.

4. The learned advocate argued for the permissibility of filing review applications under Section 35A instead of appeals under Section 35. Several judgments were cited in support of this argument. The Tribunal accepted this argument, emphasizing the availability of Section 35A as an alternative remedy.

5. The issue of calculating the limitation period under old Sections 35A and 36 was raised. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal held that the review applications were within the statutory time limit.

6. The appellants requested a remand of the case to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise. The Departmental Representative did not oppose this request. The Tribunal, after considering the records and arguments, allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned orders, and remanded the matters to the Assistant Collector for a fresh decision in compliance with the law and principles of natural justice.