- (1.) The appellant has suggested altogether six points for admission of the appeal but we admit the appeal only on the following point, which in our opinion involve substantial question of law:- i) Whether the decision of the learned Tribunal is perverse for the reason of not considering the point of limitation taken in the ground of appeal before it ?
(2.) By consent of the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, we are taking up the appeal along with stay petition for hearing. Mr.Ganguli, learned Counsel for the Revenue waives service of notice of appeal. Other formalities for making the appeal ready is also dispensed with on his consent.
(3.) The appellant was served with a show cause cum demand notice on 15th June, 2001 and allegation against it was of having availed MODVAT credit without utilising input in manufacture of final products. According to the Revenue, they detected this wrongdoing at the time of stock verification. This was the second round of the proceeding before the statutory fora. Earlier an Order in Original was passed on 22nd September 2005 broadly sustaining the Revenue's case. The Tribunal in MA 74/07 and Ex. Appeal No.EDM-168/06 however set aside the said order on 15th April, 2008 primarily on the ground that the said order was passed ex parte. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. So far as the present appeal is concerned, it arises out of an Order in Original bearing No.79/Denovo/Commr./CE/Kol-II/Adjn/2008-09 dated 9th February, 2009 passed on the basis of the same show-cause notice. In this "Order-in-Original" also, Revenue's demand was confirmed and additional penalty and interest were imposed. In appeal before the Tribunal in second round of proceeding, one of the grounds taken by the appellant was that the show cause notice was time-barred.;