https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395955 The case involved conflicting interpretations regarding the jurisdiction of CESTAT to entertain appeals against orders-in-revision post-amendment to Sections 84 and 86 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal referred the matter to a larger bench to determine the maintainability of appeals filed under Section 86 after the relevant amendment date. The decision emphasized the necessity for a consistent approach and clarity on the issue to establish a uniform standard for appeals under the Finance Act. en-us Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395955 The case involved conflicting interpretations regarding the jurisdiction of CESTAT to entertain appeals against orders-in-revision post-amendment to Sections 84 and 86 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal referred the matter to a larger bench to determine the maintainability of appeals filed under Section 86 after the relevant amendment date. The decision emphasized the necessity for a consistent approach and clarity on the issue to establish a uniform standard for appeals under the Finance Act. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395955