https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80272 Rule 41 of the CEGAT Procedure Rules, read with Section 151 CPC, permits impleadment only where the applicant is a necessary party for complete adjudication of the dispute. A mere indirect or incidental interest in a possible refund is insufficient; the applicant must show a bona fide and direct interest in the subject matter. On the facts, there was no direct dispute between the applicant and the department, no issue of proforma credit reversal, and no notice requiring repayment by the applicant. The refund controversy remained confined to the assessee and the department, so the applicant was not entitled to be impleaded as a co-appellant and the application was dismissed. en-us Tue, 24 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jun 2011 17:26:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80272 Rule 41 of the CEGAT Procedure Rules, read with Section 151 CPC, permits impleadment only where the applicant is a necessary party for complete adjudication of the dispute. A mere indirect or incidental interest in a possible refund is insufficient; the applicant must show a bona fide and direct interest in the subject matter. On the facts, there was no direct dispute between the applicant and the department, no issue of proforma credit reversal, and no notice requiring repayment by the applicant. The refund controversy remained confined to the assessee and the department, so the applicant was not entitled to be impleaded as a co-appellant and the application was dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 24 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80272