https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382245 The Tribunal rejected the application to implead the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner, CGST, Mumbai as a respondent, affirming that the Additional Director General, who issued the order in question, was the appropriate respondent per Rule 12 of the Customs, Excise, Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure Rules), 1982. The decision clarified the necessity of impleading the Commissioner who adjudicated the matter and underscored the authority granted to Officers of the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence to act as Central Excise Officers. en-us Thu, 11 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:00:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382245 The Tribunal rejected the application to implead the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner, CGST, Mumbai as a respondent, affirming that the Additional Director General, who issued the order in question, was the appropriate respondent per Rule 12 of the Customs, Excise, Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure Rules), 1982. The decision clarified the necessity of impleading the Commissioner who adjudicated the matter and underscored the authority granted to Officers of the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence to act as Central Excise Officers. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 11 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382245