TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>CESTAT Ahmedabad: Appeal, Conflicting Opinions, Rectification Application Dispute</h1> <h3>RUPALEE DYG. & PTG. WORKS Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., AHMEDABAD</h3> The CESTAT, AHMEDABAD, considered an appeal with conflicting opinions among Members. The appellants filed a Miscellaneous application for rectification ... Rectification of mistake application The appellate tribunal CESTAT, AHMEDABAD, presided over by Shri P.K. Das, heard an appeal regarding whether to allow or reject the appeals, as per the differing opinions of the learned Members. During the appeal, the appellants submitted a subsequent development, filing a Miscellaneous application for rectification of mistake and seeking clarification. The Division Bench noted that the matter was already before the Third Member and, therefore, could not pass an order on the application. The learned JCDR for the Revenue argued that the application was not maintainable at this stage, as the case had been decided by the Division Bench and was ready for hearing before the Third Member. The matter was placed before the Third Member under relevant sections of the Customs and Central Excise Acts to decide the difference of opinion between the learned Members. The tribunal agreed that the application filed by the appellants post the Division order could not be entertained by the Third Member, but granted time for the appellants to approach the Hon'ble President or Division Bench for relief on the Miscellaneous application, adjourning the matter to a later date. The case involves a significant duty demand from 1997, and the reference is broad enough to delve into the case's merits.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
