https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173554 The Tribunal clarified that its power to revisit orders is limited to final orders under sub-section (1) of Section 35C, not interlocutory orders like the one directing pre-deposit. The Tribunal emphasized the absence of legislative authority to review interlocutory orders, except for correcting typographical or mathematical errors. Despite arguments against liability for Service Tax under cargo handling service, the Tribunal dismissed the application, citing lack of jurisdiction to review the interlocutory order directing pre-deposit. en-us Wed, 14 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:01:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173554 The Tribunal clarified that its power to revisit orders is limited to final orders under sub-section (1) of Section 35C, not interlocutory orders like the one directing pre-deposit. The Tribunal emphasized the absence of legislative authority to review interlocutory orders, except for correcting typographical or mathematical errors. Despite arguments against liability for Service Tax under cargo handling service, the Tribunal dismissed the application, citing lack of jurisdiction to review the interlocutory order directing pre-deposit. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 14 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173554