https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754495 CESTAT Chandigarh-LB held that rectification applications under Section 35C of Central Excise Act are not maintainable against interim orders of Larger Bench deciding references. Following precedents in Lal Chand Anand and Hico Enterprises, the Tribunal ruled that Section 35C applies only to final orders, not orders answering references. The department's contention that reference-deciding orders should be treated as final orders was rejected. Consequently, all five rectification applications filed by the department against the interim order were dismissed as not maintainable. en-us Mon, 08 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Jun 2024 14:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754495 CESTAT Chandigarh-LB held that rectification applications under Section 35C of Central Excise Act are not maintainable against interim orders of Larger Bench deciding references. Following precedents in Lal Chand Anand and Hico Enterprises, the Tribunal ruled that Section 35C applies only to final orders, not orders answering references. The department's contention that reference-deciding orders should be treated as final orders was rejected. Consequently, all five rectification applications filed by the department against the interim order were dismissed as not maintainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 08 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754495