https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124006 The High Court remanded the appeal to the Tribunal, emphasizing the Assistant Commissioner's lack of jurisdiction. The Tribunal set aside the order confirming duty demand, granting consequential relief. The Revenue authority rejected the refund request, citing the absence of explicit relief order. The Tribunal deemed the rejection unjustified, stating that setting aside the earlier order nullified duty confirmation. It ordered a refund of the pre-deposit with interest, noting no duty demand confirmation due to jurisdictional issues and set-aside orders. en-us Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Sep 2012 14:37:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124006 The High Court remanded the appeal to the Tribunal, emphasizing the Assistant Commissioner's lack of jurisdiction. The Tribunal set aside the order confirming duty demand, granting consequential relief. The Revenue authority rejected the refund request, citing the absence of explicit relief order. The Tribunal deemed the rejection unjustified, stating that setting aside the earlier order nullified duty confirmation. It ordered a refund of the pre-deposit with interest, noting no duty demand confirmation due to jurisdictional issues and set-aside orders. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124006