IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.210 OF 2008 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.210 OF 2008 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.210 OF 2008 M/s.Ved Textiles Pvt. Ltd. ..Appellant. V/s. The Commissioner of Central Excise ..Respondent. WITH WITH WITH CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.211 OF 2008 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.211 OF 2008 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.211 OF 2008 U.R.Mehtre, Managing Director of M/s.Ved Textiles Pvt. Ltd. ..Appellant. V/s. The Commissioner of Central Excise ..Respondent. WITH WITH WITH CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.212 OF 2008 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.212 OF 2008 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.212 OF 2008 N.v.Anandwade, Production Manager of M/s.Ved Textiles Pvt. Ltd. ..Appellant. V/s. The Commissioner of Central Excise ..Respondent. WITH WITH WITH CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.213 OF 2008 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.213 OF 2008 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.213 OF 2008 U.D.Suryanmshi Director of M/s.Ved Textiles Pvt. Ltd. ..Appellant. V/s. The Commissioner of Central Excise ..Respondent. Mr.M.H.Patil for appellant. Mr.K.R.Chaudhari with Mrs.S.V.Masurkar for respondent. CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR AND CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR AND CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. - = : 2 : = - DATED : 28TH NOVEMBER, 2008. DATED : 28TH NOVEMBER, 2008. DATED : 28TH NOVEMBER, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Since common point is involved in all these appeals, all these appeals are taken for hearing together. By filing these appeals, the appellant has challenged the order passed by the Tribunal dated 21/8/2008 as well as the order dated 28/11/2007. 2. By the aforesaid orders, the Tribunal has found that earlier the Tribunal had decided the matter on merits and a fresh application for rectification is rejected. In this view of the matter, it is required to be noted that in the order dated 21/8/2008 and 28/11/2007, there is no reference as to whether the point of limitation was dealt with. It is, therefore, not possible to hold that the point of limitation was considered on merits by the Tribunal. Earlier this Court by its order dated 15/10/2008 had issued notice with a view to see whether the matter can be sent back to the Tribunal on this issue. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the Tribunal has considered that point. However, nothing is reflected in the order regarding the point of limitation as to whether the said issue has been dealt with, except observing that the point was considered. - = : 3 : = - 3. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. The appeals are remanded back to the Tribunal for deciding the appeal for de novo consideration in accordance with law on the point of limitation as the point of limitation has not been properly dealt with. We have not considered the issue on merits and the Tribunal may decide as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of 6 weeks from the from the receipt of this order without being influenced by this order. 4. Accordingly, impugned order is set aside and the Tribunal may decide the matter in accordance with law in the light of the aforesaid observations. 5. Appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. (P.B.MAJMUDAR (P.B.MAJMUDAR (P.B.MAJMUDAR J.) J.) J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)