9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 531X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... settled proposition of law. The remand was an open one and all the legal points which are available to the petitioner was kept open to be decided by the adjudicating officer - The order of remand cannot stand in the way of raising a legal plea that the same was either raised or not raised in an earlier round of litigation. Probably, the Tribunal was trying to take shelter under Explanation IV to Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code which estopped the parties to agitate the plea which was available as ground of attack or defence in an earlier proceedings and having not raised, the same cannot be re-agitate - matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. - W.P. No. 66 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 20-3-2014 - Harish Tandon, J. Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was again set aside by the CESTAT with a specific direction upon the adjudicating officer to decide the matter afresh in the light of the observations made in the first order of remand. The department did not challenge the order of remand in either of the occasions. The order of remand suggests that the entire issue is at large before the adjudicating officer who is required to consider afresh, meaning thereby, it should not be influenced by the observations made in the earlier order which stood quashed and set aside while remanding the matter to the assessing officer. 3. In the impugned order the Tribunal have recorded that since the order of remand is not assailed, which has reached in its finality, the petitioner cannot raise the iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected to keep adherence thereof. 9. Mr. Sharaff, learned counsel for the respondents apprehends that despite the time bound order passed by this Court, the same is ordinarily not adhered to and insisted for keeping this writ petition alive for the purpose of compliance. 10. In view of the above, let this matter appear after six weeks when the respective parties would inform the Court whether the directions passed in this order has been complied with or not. 11. For abundant precaution, it is hereby made clear that this order shall not be construed to have any impact on the merits of the said proceeding as this Court has no occasion to go into it. It is open to the CESTAT to take an independent view without being influenced by any o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
