https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362090 The adjudicating authority decided the matter on facts without examining the appellant's legal objection that Rule 3 of the capacity determination rules was ultra vires and that the levy provisions could not sustain the demand. Because the core legal challenge and the authorities cited on both sides were not considered at first instance, the matter required reconsideration. The impugned order was set aside and the appeals were remanded for fresh adjudication after deciding the validity of the rule and the applicability of the levy provisions. en-us Thu, 24 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Sep 2022 13:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362090 The adjudicating authority decided the matter on facts without examining the appellant's legal objection that Rule 3 of the capacity determination rules was ultra vires and that the levy provisions could not sustain the demand. Because the core legal challenge and the authorities cited on both sides were not considered at first instance, the matter required reconsideration. The impugned order was set aside and the appeals were remanded for fresh adjudication after deciding the validity of the rule and the applicability of the levy provisions. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 24 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362090