9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 636X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sambi Reddy, JDR, for the Respondent. ORDER These appeals arise from Order-in-Appeal No. 81 & 143/2006 (V-II)-C.E. dated 17-11-2006. The Commissioner (A) has dismissed the appeals in terms of sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on the ground that the appellants have filed beyond the limitation prescribed under the Section and that the Commissioner (A) is not empowered t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me involved in adjudicating before a wrong forum is required to be excluded while computing the limitation under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act. They relied on Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which provides for excluding the time spent in a wrong forum. However, the Commissioner (A) has not examined this issue. 3. The learned Counsel refers to a similar matter which has been agitated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also relied on the ruling of Krishak Bharti Cooperative Ltd. v. CCE, Surat-I - 2003 (159) E.L.T. 352 (Tri.-Del.). The learned JDR further submitted that the period of limitation prescribed under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act and Section 128 of Customs Act are specific. Both the legislations are special legislations and there is no proviso carved out for applying the Limitation Act, hence Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y and in bona fide proceedings before High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and before Supreme Court. It follows from both the rulings that the provisions of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been resorted to by both the Supreme Court and High Court while condoning the delay in filing the appeal. In sum, the effect of both the ruling is that if a wrong forum has been c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
