Asian Paints (India) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
.....11 a - two sections operate in different zones and are invoked for different purposes - both have different time limits - recovery of excise duty could be made pursuant to an appeal given though time limit under section 11 a has expired - order 1, rule 10 & section 96: [arijit pasayat , lokeshwar singh panta & p. sathasivam, jj] first appeal - suit for partition and separate possession - high court allowing impleading of purchasers pendente lite as party respondents in appeal? - when the purchasers approached the high court for their impleadment and for directions, final decree proceeding was pending before the trial court -- in fact, it was pointed out that pursuant to the application filed for passing final decree, a commissioner was appointed for division of the suit properties.....1. we have read the judgments of the larger bench of the customs, excise and gold (control) appellate tribunal, which are impugned in these appeals. we are of the view that the judgments viewed sections 35e and 11a of the central excise act in the proper perspective.the two sections operate in different fields and are invoked for different purposes. different time limits are, therefore, set out therein. we do not accept the contention that recovery of excise duty cannot be made pursuant to an appeal filed after invoking the provisions of section 35e if the time limited provided in section 11a has expired. to so read the provisions would be to render section 35e virtually ineffective, which would be imperssible.2. the appeals are dismissed with costs.