9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (12) TMI 310X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... N. Khanna, J.D.R., for the Respondent. ORDER Originally preferred as a revision application before the Central Government, on transfer to this Tribunal, the matter is, being treated as an appeal as provided in Section 35-P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter to be referred to as Act). The present appeal is directed against the order dated 29-12-1980 passed by the Central Board ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application against the order passed by the Board under its appellate jurisdiction was to be preferred before the Central Government under Section 36 of the Act. The Central Government, while exercising their powers of revision, waived time limits in certain deserving cases. The Central Government did so in exercise of Government's inherent powers. The learned Counsel's submission is that this Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time limits set out in the statute. The learned Counsel was not in a position to cite any decision on this point. We are not aware under what circumstances the Central Government in exercise of powers under Section 36 of the Act, as it stood at the relevant time had condoned delays with regard to statutory limitation. So far as this Tribunal is concerned, it is a creature of the statute itself an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld sympathetically consider technical delays of limitation and go into merits of the case. 5. Section 35-P(2) merely confers authority on the Tribunal to entertain as appeals what were preferred as revisions applications before the Central Government. We see no warrant for the interpretation placed by the learned Counsel that the said section empowers us to condone a delay which had occurre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
