https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48478 The Revenue contended that a substantial question of law arose because the Tribunal had not separately dealt with every ground raised before it. The Court held that no such question arose for consideration, as the rectification applications had already been rejected on the basis that the original appellate order had considered the relevant contentions. In the absence of any separate adjudicatory error warranting interference, the appeal was not entertained. en-us Tue, 09 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48478 The Revenue contended that a substantial question of law arose because the Tribunal had not separately dealt with every ground raised before it. The Court held that no such question arose for consideration, as the rectification applications had already been rejected on the basis that the original appellate order had considered the relevant contentions. In the absence of any separate adjudicatory error warranting interference, the appeal was not entertained. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 09 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48478