https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72762 The court criticized the Collector (Appeals) for errors in remanding cases without legal basis and reopening settled issues. It found the decision lacked coherence and failed to address crucial excisability issues. The judgment emphasized the need for a fresh consideration of all cases and overturned the Collector (Appeals) order, highlighting gaps in information and inconsistencies in determining the manufacturer's identity and excisability of products. The court remanded the cases for further examination, emphasizing the importance of considering previous orders and guidelines in Central Excise Laws. en-us Wed, 29 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 May 2011 18:30:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72762 The court criticized the Collector (Appeals) for errors in remanding cases without legal basis and reopening settled issues. It found the decision lacked coherence and failed to address crucial excisability issues. The judgment emphasized the need for a fresh consideration of all cases and overturned the Collector (Appeals) order, highlighting gaps in information and inconsistencies in determining the manufacturer's identity and excisability of products. The court remanded the cases for further examination, emphasizing the importance of considering previous orders and guidelines in Central Excise Laws. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 29 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72762