https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306533 The Court considered whether the matter should be decided by a larger Bench in light of conflicting precedent and the earlier decision in Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur. It concluded that authoritative resolution of the legal questions required reference to a three-Judge Bench to maintain consistency in precedent. No merits determination was made. The petition was directed to be placed before a three-Judge Bench for consideration, subject to the orders of the Chief Justice. en-us Mon, 09 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Feb 2023 10:09:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306533 The Court considered whether the matter should be decided by a larger Bench in light of conflicting precedent and the earlier decision in Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur. It concluded that authoritative resolution of the legal questions required reference to a three-Judge Bench to maintain consistency in precedent. No merits determination was made. The petition was directed to be placed before a three-Judge Bench for consideration, subject to the orders of the Chief Justice. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 09 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306533