https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206820 The High Court found that the CESTAT erred in dismissing the appeal by relying on Section 9D of the Central Excise Act without the Assessing Officer invoking it initially. The court emphasized that the tribunal must reassess the application of Section 9D, ensuring the appellant's right to contest its applicability. Additionally, the court highlighted that the appellant's right to cross-examine witnesses was not forfeited due to the department's failure to produce them, directing the tribunal to reconsider this issue. The appeal was remanded for a fresh decision by the tribunal, with interim measures outlined to address the situation. en-us Tue, 08 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Sep 2012 11:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206820 The High Court found that the CESTAT erred in dismissing the appeal by relying on Section 9D of the Central Excise Act without the Assessing Officer invoking it initially. The court emphasized that the tribunal must reassess the application of Section 9D, ensuring the appellant's right to contest its applicability. Additionally, the court highlighted that the appellant's right to cross-examine witnesses was not forfeited due to the department's failure to produce them, directing the tribunal to reconsider this issue. The appeal was remanded for a fresh decision by the tribunal, with interim measures outlined to address the situation. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 08 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206820