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>Commissioner (Appeals) empowered to remand cases post amendment. CESTAT CHENNAI affirms order.</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., PONDICHERRY Versus AMARAVATHY CHEMICALS LTD.</h3> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI upheld the power of the Commissioner (Appeals) to remand a case despite the amendment of Section 35A(3) of the ... Power of Commissioner (Appeals) to remand a case - Amendment of Section 35A(3) of the CEA, 1944 - Held that: - the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-I v. Medico Labs [2004 (9) TMI 108 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD] that even after the amendment to the statutory provision noted above, the Commissioner (Appeals) continues to have the power to remand the case - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI upheld the power of the Commissioner (Appeals) to remand a case even after the amendment of Section 35A(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The decision was based on the Gujarat High Court's ruling in Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-I v. Medico Labs and the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India v. Umesh Dhaimode. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the impugned order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
