TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a question of law arose from the Tribunal's order so as to justify reference to the High Court on the applicability of Entry 10 or Entry 12 of Notification No. 16/94-C.E. (N.T.) to subsidiary gate passes issued after 1-4-1994 where the original gate passes were issued before that date.
Analysis: Notification No. 16/94-C.E. (N.T.) is framed as a table of authorised duty-paying documents issued at different times. On the facts placed before the Bench, the claim could reasonably fall either under Entry 10, as urged by the Revenue, or under Entry 12, as accepted in the earlier order. The dispute therefore turned on the proper interpretation of the notification and not on a merely factual controversy. Since the notification did not unequivocally exclude one entry in favour of the other, the controversy gave rise to a substantial question of law.
Conclusion: A question of law did arise, and the reference was made to the High Court on the framed question concerning eligibility of the documents for Modvat credit.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing notification lists alternative categories of duty-paying documents and the applicable entry is debatable on the admitted facts, the issue becomes one of interpretation of the notification and gives rise to a referable question of law.
TaxTMI 
