https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72537 Overlapping proposed questions cannot support a reference when they in substance raise only one issue on computation of limitation for refund claims under the Central Excise Rules. The Tribunal held that the earlier order was decided on special facts, did not lay down any general principle, and therefore did not give rise to a referable question of law under Section 35G. Any grievance that the earlier decision was relied upon had to be pursued before the appropriate court, not through a reference application. The reference was therefore not maintainable. en-us Mon, 30 Jun 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 May 2011 12:52:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72537 Overlapping proposed questions cannot support a reference when they in substance raise only one issue on computation of limitation for refund claims under the Central Excise Rules. The Tribunal held that the earlier order was decided on special facts, did not lay down any general principle, and therefore did not give rise to a referable question of law under Section 35G. Any grievance that the earlier decision was relied upon had to be pursued before the appropriate court, not through a reference application. The reference was therefore not maintainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 30 Jun 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72537