https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457152 Rejection of an application for fixation of special rate of value addition solely on limitation was not sustained where the authority had issued a non-speaking order and failed to consider the claim under Para 2.1 of Notification No. 56/2002-C.E., as amended. The High Court noted the consistent approach in similar matters that the 30 September filing cut-off should not, by itself, defeat consideration of such applications. The impugned order was kept in abeyance and the application was directed to be reconsidered afresh in terms of the notification. en-us Tue, 22 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Sep 2024 16:58:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457152 Rejection of an application for fixation of special rate of value addition solely on limitation was not sustained where the authority had issued a non-speaking order and failed to consider the claim under Para 2.1 of Notification No. 56/2002-C.E., as amended. The High Court noted the consistent approach in similar matters that the 30 September filing cut-off should not, by itself, defeat consideration of such applications. The impugned order was kept in abeyance and the application was directed to be reconsidered afresh in terms of the notification. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457152