https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206701 The larger Bench concluded that the Aurangabad Bench's decision to remand the matter without expressing a view on the CESTAT's order or the Supreme Court's ruling was not justified. It held that the Aurangabad Bench's decision could not be treated as a precedent, and the Division Bench could dispose of the appeals on their own merits. The reference was disposed of with no order as to costs, and the contentions of both sides were kept open for the Division Bench to decide in accordance with the law. en-us Wed, 09 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 May 2013 14:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206701 The larger Bench concluded that the Aurangabad Bench's decision to remand the matter without expressing a view on the CESTAT's order or the Supreme Court's ruling was not justified. It held that the Aurangabad Bench's decision could not be treated as a precedent, and the Division Bench could dispose of the appeals on their own merits. The reference was disposed of with no order as to costs, and the contentions of both sides were kept open for the Division Bench to decide in accordance with the law. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206701