Excise Duty – Under Section 35C(2) CESTAT cannot altogether take a different view in law and it cannot reappreciate evidence

CCE Vs RDC Concrete (India) P. Ltd. – Supreme Court of India- There was no mistake apparent on record when the CESTAT did not accept a submission of the respondent-assessee to the effect that the officer appointed to value the goods manufactured by asessee should not have been engaged as a cost accountant. CESTAT exceeded its powers and it tried to re-appreciate the evidence and it reconsidered its legal view taken earlier in pursuance of a rectification application. In our opinion, the CESTAT could not have done so while exercising its

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.