The HC held that an appeal against the CESTAT order would lie before the Supreme Court u/s 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as the original order passed by the Commissioner considered issues relating to taxability, allowability of CENVAT credit, and imposition of penalty, despite CESTAT only examining the limitation issue. Consequently, the HC dismissed the present appeal as not maintainable before it.
The HC held that an appeal against the CESTAT order would lie before the Supreme Court u/s 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as the original order passed by the Commissioner considered issues relating to taxability, allowability of CENVAT credit, and imposition of penalty, despite CESTAT only examining the limitation issue. Consequently, the HC dismissed the present appeal as not maintainable before it.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
