AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Position of withdrawal in Departmental Cases raised monetary limits SC 25Lakhs -1 Crores) / HC 20 -50 Lakhs/ CESTAT 10-20 Lakhs,,,,,,,,,,,,
S.No.,"I.
Zones (in alphabetical
order)","II.
Identified",,,"III.
 Filed",,,,"IV.
Withdrawn",,,
,,SCÂ HC,CESTAT,TOTAL,SC,HC,CESTAT,TOTAL,SC,HC,FILED,WITHDRAWN
,,(a) (b),(c),(d),(e),(f),(g),(h),(i),(j),(k),(l)
,,SC,HC,CESTAT,TOTAL,SC,HC,CESTAT,TOTAL,,,
,,(a),(b),(c),(d),(a),(b),(c),(d),,,
circumstances, the questions of law which have been raised by the appellant are answered against the appellant-Revenue and the appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. 7. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties.",,,,,,,,,,,,
Taking into consideration the ratio laid down bythe Allahabad High Court, as quoted above, only on the basis of statement of Tara Chand who was the partner of the Company, case of the department is not sustainable.",,,,,,,,,,,,
In that view of the matter, in our consideredopinion, the Tribunal has not committed any error in reversing the view taken by the Commissioner Excise. In that view of matter, no substantial question of law arises. However, we make it clear",,,,,,,,,,,,
that since no other material was available as per judgment of Allahabad High Court, therefore, we are not interfering. “",,,,,,,,,,,,
In view of the above, no substantial questions of law arises.",,,,,,,,,,,,
The appeal stands dismissed.,,,,,,,,,,,,