https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451133 In remand proceedings, an adjudicating authority cannot reopen an issue that has already attained finality in earlier appellate proceedings, nor can it expand the scope of remand beyond the limited question actually sent back for reconsideration. The settled finding on related person valuation, which was not challenged further, remained binding, and the remand was confined to the specific question of advertisement and sales promotion expenditure. Reliance on a Tribunal precedent later set aside by the Supreme Court was also impermissible once the connected issue had become final between the same parties. Judicial discipline required adherence to the earlier unchallenged finding and the final Supreme Court ruling, rendering the demand based on reopening unsustainable. en-us Tue, 19 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Mar 2024 12:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451133 In remand proceedings, an adjudicating authority cannot reopen an issue that has already attained finality in earlier appellate proceedings, nor can it expand the scope of remand beyond the limited question actually sent back for reconsideration. The settled finding on related person valuation, which was not challenged further, remained binding, and the remand was confined to the specific question of advertisement and sales promotion expenditure. Reliance on a Tribunal precedent later set aside by the Supreme Court was also impermissible once the connected issue had become final between the same parties. Judicial discipline required adherence to the earlier unchallenged finding and the final Supreme Court ruling, rendering the demand based on reopening unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 19 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451133