9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1448X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Advocate ORDER MAHESH GROVER, J.(ORAL) This appeal by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Jammu & Kashmir has been filed impugning the action of the Tribunal in declining rectification of its own order as the application moved for the purpose was beyond the period of six months prescribed. The delay in doing so was 7 days over and above the prescribed period of six months. The questions of la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n'ble Supreme Court in para 19, 21, 27 and 29, which are reproduced herebelow:- "19. It is true that the period of limitation specified in terms of Sub-Section (2) of Section 129(B) of the Customs Act is required to be observed but the Tribunal failed to notice that it has inherent power of recalling its own order if sufficient cause is shown therefor. The principles of natural justice, whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justice, which is being above law, nothing fetters the judges hands from considering the matter on merit. 22 to 26 xxxx 27. It may be true, as has been contended by Mr. Abhichandani, learned senior counsel that Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 will have no application in view of the fact that provisions governing limitation are contained in the Customs Act. It is so for in a matter of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ufficient cause is shown for the delay in approaching it. In the impugned order the Tribunal has observed that it has no power to condone the delay in view of the decision rendered by the Karnataka High Court. Clearly the Tribunal fell in error by not noticing the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court recorded in Sunita Devi Singhania's case (supra). We, therefore, set aside the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
