Disputed factual findings under the Central Excise Rules required fresh adjudication after considering the appellant's evidence.

Disputed facts concerning whether export benefit under the Central Excise Rules had been availed required fresh factual scrutiny. The record below proceeded on the assumption that the benefit was taken, while the appellant denied this and sought consideration of additional certificates and a further hearing. Because the foundational factual position was unresolved and the appellant's evidence had not been fully considered, the matter was sent back for reconsideration. The original adjudicating authority was directed to record a fresh finding and decide the issue anew after taking the appellant's evidence on record and proceeding in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication in view of the disputed factual position regarding availing of the benefit under the Central Excise Rules and the alleged non-consideration of the evidence produced by the appellant.

Analysis: The factual basis adopted below was that the exports had been made after availing the benefit of the relevant Central Excise Rules, while the appellant specifically asserted that no such benefit had been taken and sought consideration of additional certificates and further hearing. Since the correctness of the foundational facts themselves was in dispute, the existing record was not treated as sufficient for a final determination. The matter therefore required reconsideration after taking the appellant's evidence on record and deciding the issue afresh in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh factual finding and decision after considering the evidence of the appellant.

---