https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73379 Direct concern with the dispute gave the appellants locus standi, and the appeal delay was treated as not undue because they first pursued writ proceedings and then approached the Tribunal promptly after the High Court's final order. Rule 56B was held not to be denied merely because the semi-finished goods were sold by the original manufacturer to another assessee; sale alone was not a valid basis to withdraw the facility. The post-amendment tariff change, however, had not been examined on the available material, so the effect of the revised classification on continued eligibility under Rule 56B required fresh departmental consideration. The order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for decision on the merits. en-us Thu, 13 Aug 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 May 2011 15:30:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73379 Direct concern with the dispute gave the appellants locus standi, and the appeal delay was treated as not undue because they first pursued writ proceedings and then approached the Tribunal promptly after the High Court's final order. Rule 56B was held not to be denied merely because the semi-finished goods were sold by the original manufacturer to another assessee; sale alone was not a valid basis to withdraw the facility. The post-amendment tariff change, however, had not been examined on the available material, so the effect of the revised classification on continued eligibility under Rule 56B required fresh departmental consideration. The order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for decision on the merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 13 Aug 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73379