https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255554 The appeal (C.E.A. No. 11 of 2012) against the Tribunal's judgment and order from 17-8-2005 was dismissed as no substantial question of law was found. The Court upheld the Tribunal's fact-finding and legal application, noting discrepancies in the Commissioner's conclusions on machinery age. Despite adjourning for a Chartered Engineer's Certificate, its absence led to dismissal. The failure to produce the certificate and irrelevant new material resulted in the appeal's rejection. Subsequently, pending miscellaneous petitions were dismissed, and Reference Cases (C.E.R.C. Nos. 2 of 2004 and 4 of 2004) were also dismissed without costs due to the primary appeal outcome. en-us Thu, 13 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Jan 2015 11:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255554 The appeal (C.E.A. No. 11 of 2012) against the Tribunal's judgment and order from 17-8-2005 was dismissed as no substantial question of law was found. The Court upheld the Tribunal's fact-finding and legal application, noting discrepancies in the Commissioner's conclusions on machinery age. Despite adjourning for a Chartered Engineer's Certificate, its absence led to dismissal. The failure to produce the certificate and irrelevant new material resulted in the appeal's rejection. Subsequently, pending miscellaneous petitions were dismissed, and Reference Cases (C.E.R.C. Nos. 2 of 2004 and 4 of 2004) were also dismissed without costs due to the primary appeal outcome. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 13 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255554