<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1985 (12) TMI 263 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73345</link>
    <description>A question is referable where it presents a substantive question of law arising from the order, especially if there is a conflict of judicial opinion on the statutory scope. On that basis, the limitation issue under Section 40(2) and the connected operation of Rule 40 and Rule 10 were treated as referable, along with related questions flowing from the same controversy. By contrast, questions turning on appreciation of evidence, factual existence of illicit transport or receipt, private accounts, or matters not directly arising from the Tribunal&#039;s order were held non-referable. The document distinguishes legal issues suitable for reference from factual or academic questions that cannot be referred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Dec 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 12:28:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=111624" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (12) TMI 263 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73345</link>
      <description>A question is referable where it presents a substantive question of law arising from the order, especially if there is a conflict of judicial opinion on the statutory scope. On that basis, the limitation issue under Section 40(2) and the connected operation of Rule 40 and Rule 10 were treated as referable, along with related questions flowing from the same controversy. By contrast, questions turning on appreciation of evidence, factual existence of illicit transport or receipt, private accounts, or matters not directly arising from the Tribunal&#039;s order were held non-referable. The document distinguishes legal issues suitable for reference from factual or academic questions that cannot be referred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Dec 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73345</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>