https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106807 The reference on whether the assessee's appeal was maintainable did not require Larger Bench consideration because the Revenue did not dispute maintainability and the referring order had not concluded that the assessee was not an aggrieved person. The dispute related to denial of benefit under Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, but the point referred did not disclose any real controversy warranting a Larger Bench answer. As the earlier decision relied upon was not shown to be doubtful on the referred issue, the reference was treated as not arising and the matter was sent back to the Regular Bench for hearing on merits. en-us Mon, 02 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Mar 2012 17:28:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106807 The reference on whether the assessee's appeal was maintainable did not require Larger Bench consideration because the Revenue did not dispute maintainability and the referring order had not concluded that the assessee was not an aggrieved person. The dispute related to denial of benefit under Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, but the point referred did not disclose any real controversy warranting a Larger Bench answer. As the earlier decision relied upon was not shown to be doubtful on the referred issue, the reference was treated as not arising and the matter was sent back to the Regular Bench for hearing on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 02 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106807