https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42072 The Delhi High Court considered whether an appellate authority could require deposit of disputed excise duty before hearing an appeal involving inclusion of service contract charges in assessable value under Section 4(4)(d) of the Central Excises and Salt Act. It noted that departmental instructions do not bind quasi-judicial appellate bodies, which must apply the statute on its plain terms. On the facts, the disputed amount had not been collected from consumers and the matter did not involve unjust enrichment. The court therefore directed that the appeal be heard without insisting on pre-deposit, leaving the valuation dispute to be decided in appeal. en-us Mon, 19 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Jun 2010 18:50:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42072 The Delhi High Court considered whether an appellate authority could require deposit of disputed excise duty before hearing an appeal involving inclusion of service contract charges in assessable value under Section 4(4)(d) of the Central Excises and Salt Act. It noted that departmental instructions do not bind quasi-judicial appellate bodies, which must apply the statute on its plain terms. On the facts, the disputed amount had not been collected from consumers and the matter did not involve unjust enrichment. The court therefore directed that the appeal be heard without insisting on pre-deposit, leaving the valuation dispute to be decided in appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 19 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42072