https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2666 For an abatement order under Rule 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the question was whether the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise was the competent authority under Notification No. 31/2000-C.E. (N.T.) dated 31-3-2000. The Tribunal had already answered the issue against the Revenue, and the High Court found no substantial question of law in that view. The Court therefore declined interference, upheld the Tribunal's conclusion, and the issue remained decided in favour of the assessee. en-us Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2666 For an abatement order under Rule 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the question was whether the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise was the competent authority under Notification No. 31/2000-C.E. (N.T.) dated 31-3-2000. The Tribunal had already answered the issue against the Revenue, and the High Court found no substantial question of law in that view. The Court therefore declined interference, upheld the Tribunal's conclusion, and the issue remained decided in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2666