https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766872 The court ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the department's adjustment of the rebate against the demand. It found that there was no existing confirmed demand since the matter was still pending before the adjudicating authority following the remand order by the Revisionary Authority. The court distinguished the case from others cited by the department, emphasizing that the adjustment was inappropriate as the demand had not attained finality. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, and the decision was pronounced in open court. en-us Thu, 06 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Mar 2025 07:35:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766872 The court ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the department's adjustment of the rebate against the demand. It found that there was no existing confirmed demand since the matter was still pending before the adjudicating authority following the remand order by the Revisionary Authority. The court distinguished the case from others cited by the department, emphasizing that the adjustment was inappropriate as the demand had not attained finality. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, and the decision was pronounced in open court. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 06 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766872