https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461482 The HC held that a tax appeal seeking recovery of an alleged erroneous refund under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was covered by its earlier decision on the same controversy. Because the substantial question of law was materially identical to one already decided in the same factual and legal setting, the Court applied the binding precedent and found no merit in the later appeal. The appeal was dismissed. en-us Tue, 03 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Apr 2025 18:15:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461482 The HC held that a tax appeal seeking recovery of an alleged erroneous refund under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was covered by its earlier decision on the same controversy. Because the substantial question of law was materially identical to one already decided in the same factual and legal setting, the Court applied the binding precedent and found no merit in the later appeal. The appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 03 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461482