COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. FASCINATE COSMETICS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this Revenue appeal, the Order -in -Original No. 2/92, dated 17 -1 -1992 passed by Additional Commissioner of Central Excise has been impugned before us in terms of Board's Review directions dated 18 -12 -1992. Consequently, the Commissioner of Central Excise, Madras filed an appeal before this Tribunal which was received on 26 -2 -1993 in the Registry at Madras.

(2.) WHEN called, none appeared for the respondents. Heard Mrs. Aruna Gupta, ld. JDR who reiterates the grounds of appeal.

(3.) WE have carefully considered the grounds as well as the records of the case and we find that the issue regarding the limitation of one year prescribed under Section 35E(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 has been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of C.C.E. v. MM. Rubber Co. as in 1991 (55) E.L.T. 289 (S.C). The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in cases of appeal by Department, powers of suo motu review by the Central Board of Excise and Customs and Collectors shall be issued before the expiry of the one -year period from the date of the order. We find that in this case the order reviewing the said order -in -original has been issued by the Board on 11 -12 -1992 which is well within the one -year period of the date of the order. However, in the same judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in para 6 thereof has held as under : -