https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330206 A second revision application was held not maintainable where the disputed rebate amount had already been decided in earlier revision proceedings and the earlier order had attained finality. The revisional authority treated the rebate claim as time barred in the first round, and because that decision was not shown to have been challenged further, the same issue could not be reopened on a subsequent revision. The later proceedings were therefore treated as infructuous, and the challenge was rejected at the threshold on maintainability. en-us Thu, 28 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Jul 2016 11:43:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330206 A second revision application was held not maintainable where the disputed rebate amount had already been decided in earlier revision proceedings and the earlier order had attained finality. The revisional authority treated the rebate claim as time barred in the first round, and because that decision was not shown to have been challenged further, the same issue could not be reopened on a subsequent revision. The later proceedings were therefore treated as infructuous, and the challenge was rejected at the threshold on maintainability. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 28 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330206