https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776142 Demand under Notification No. 56/2002-CE was held premature where the assessee had sought the special rate mechanism under Notification No. 19/2008 and the applications for several years were still pending before the jurisdictional Commissioner. The Tribunal had already fixed the special rate for one year in the assessee's own case, but the impugned demands were confirmed while the remaining applications were undecided. In these circumstances, confirmation of demand before the competent authority determined the special rate applications was unsustainable because the assessee's entitlement depended on that pending determination and premature adjudication would only multiply litigation. The matter was remanded for fresh decision after the special rate applications are decided. en-us Thu, 17 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Aug 2025 08:19:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776142 Demand under Notification No. 56/2002-CE was held premature where the assessee had sought the special rate mechanism under Notification No. 19/2008 and the applications for several years were still pending before the jurisdictional Commissioner. The Tribunal had already fixed the special rate for one year in the assessee's own case, but the impugned demands were confirmed while the remaining applications were undecided. In these circumstances, confirmation of demand before the competent authority determined the special rate applications was unsustainable because the assessee's entitlement depended on that pending determination and premature adjudication would only multiply litigation. The matter was remanded for fresh decision after the special rate applications are decided. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 17 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776142