Rule 8(3A) of the CER, 2002

[Rathnasabapathy V]

Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 is held to be unconstitutional. Whether the order of the department confirming the demand is sustainable? what is the legal position?

What is the stand of the Department?

[KASTURI SETHI]

Pl. mention citation of case law of the court which has set aside Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. It will make convenient for experts to inform the status.

[DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN]

As informed by Shri K. Sethi you have not mentioned the case law in which Rule 8(3A) has been set aside. The said case may be gone for appeal by the Department and stay could have been obtained. If the order is getting finality in holding that the said Rule is unconstiutional, then the order passed by the Authority is invalid. Even you could have placed the said argument before the hearing with the Authority.

AI Summary

Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules 2002 Unconstitutional: Impact on Departmental Orders and Legal Stance A discussion on Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, which has been declared unconstitutional, raises questions about the sustainability of departmental orders confirming demands under this rule. Participants inquire about the legal position and the department's stance. One respondent requests a citation of the court case that invalidated the rule to provide clarity. Another suggests that if the rule's unconstitutionality is upheld without appeal, any related departmental orders would be invalid. The importance of presenting such arguments during hearings with authorities is emphasized.