9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 396X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... OCATE), SMT.PRIYA MAHESH, SMT.PRIYA MANJOORAN FOR THE RESPONDENT : SMT.A.SREEKALA, STANDING COUNSEL, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS JUDGMENT Vinod Chandran, J. The appellant is aggrieved with the order passed at Annexure-D by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench at Bangalore [for brevity "CESTAT"]. The CESTAT, by the said order, refused to restore an app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o continuance of the proceedings as per the earlier Rules. Hence, the CESTAT by Annexure-B order dated 08.03.2001, rejected a number of appeals filed under the MODVAT Credit Rules for reason of there being no saving clause enabling the continuance of such proceedings. Three of assessee's appeals were rejected, as is seen from Annexure-D order produced. 3. The CE Act provided a saving clause, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant had an accrued right insofar as filing the application within the limitation period so provided. 4. We are not ready to accept the aforesaid contention, since there is no right accrued on the appellant insofar as the limitation provided in the statute at the time of the original order. When the period of limitation is reduced to the prejudice of the litigant, then necessarily an applicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Annexure-B, as seen from the cause titles of a number of appeals extracted in the order. The appellant diligently filed two appeals and left out the appeal in the present proceedings. The appellant is found to have not diligently prosecuted the appeal in the present proceedings. In such circumstance, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with Annexure-D order. The Central Excise Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
