CCE Vs. SHAW WALLACE GELATINE LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard both sides.

(2.) Revenue filed this appeal against the Order -in -Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the order of review was passed after one year from the date of the adjudication order. Therefore, the appeal is not maintainable.

(3.) The contention of the Revenue is that the adjudicating authority signed the order on 29.10.97. Therefore, the date of order is 29.10.97, whereas in the impugned order held that the date of order is 28.10.97, The contention of the Revenue is also that as per provisions of Limitation Act, the period for obtaining copy of the order is to be excluded from the period of limitation. The contention of the Revenue is that while construing a statute, plain meaning of the language is to be looked into and two reasonably possible view can be taken that one which would promote its constitutionality should be preferred. The respondents relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. MM. Rubber Co. to submit that the review order should be passed within a period of one year from the date of order.