https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372765 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, dismissing the appellant's claims regarding jurisdiction and legality of the Tribunal's order. It held that the appellant was liable to pay the excess duty collected due to upward revision of rates under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Additionally, the Court confirmed the demand of interest under Section 11DD, finding no merit in the appellant's arguments against it. The Court also rejected the appellant's contention of judicial impropriety by not following a binding precedent, affirming the lower authorities' orders. en-us Fri, 07 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Jun 2019 15:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372765 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, dismissing the appellant's claims regarding jurisdiction and legality of the Tribunal's order. It held that the appellant was liable to pay the excess duty collected due to upward revision of rates under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Additionally, the Court confirmed the demand of interest under Section 11DD, finding no merit in the appellant's arguments against it. The Court also rejected the appellant's contention of judicial impropriety by not following a binding precedent, affirming the lower authorities' orders. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372765