TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (1) TMI 154
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... kept renewed. As such I recall the order and dispose of the writ petition on merits. The writ petitioner has challenged a demand of the respondent No. 1 for excise duty in respect of the goods manufactured by him. An order dated 16-4-1985 passed by the Respondent No. 1 directing payment of excise duty was challenged by the petitioner in an appeal to the Collector. During the pendency of the said ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Bench of this Court directing the Tribunal to state a case. The questions framed in the reference relate to the liability of the petitioner to pay excise duty in respect of the said goods manufactured by him. 2. The Excise authorities are now seeking to recover the dues amounting to Rs. 1,03,715.82 arising out of the order dated 16-4-1985. The petitioner contends that pending the hearing of the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 5. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi v. Bansidhar & Sons reported in 1986 (24) E.L.T. 193 (SC) = (1986) 157 ITR 665 the Supreme Court held that an appeal is kept pending before the Appellate Tribunal until the High Court answers the questions referred to it. The appellate jurisdiction is retained by the Tribunal to dispose of the appeal in accordance with the opinion expressed ....