JUDGMENT : The learned Counsel for the respondent, Mr. K.J. John says that the Refund Application filed by the respondent-company was rejected by the Asstt. Collector, Central Excise, on the ground of limitation, against which the respondent-company filed an appeal before the Collector (Appeals), which was also dismissed. The respondent-company then carried the matter to the Tribunal which allowed the Refund Application, against which the Department came by way of appeal to this Court in Civil Appeal No. 1266 of 1991. The said appeal was dismissed by this Court under the following order : "So far as the merits are concerned, we see no ground for admitting the appeal. The appeal is dismissed. So far as the refund is concerned, it is open to the parties to raise such contentions as are open to them in law, including the 1991 amendment to the Central Excise Act." In this view of the matter, the learned Counsel for the respondent says that the plea now sought to be raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant that Refund Application is barred by time cannot be permitted to be raised. 2. In view of the said statement of the learned Counsel, we dismiss the Special Leave Petition. We again observe that so far as the refund is concerned, it is open to the petitioner to raise such contentions as are open to him in law including the 1991 Amendment to the Central Excise Act.