https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264766 Classification of the goods remained undecided on merits, while the first appellate authority had focused on pre-deposit rather than the substantive dispute. The Tribunal noted that duty had been accepted on similar goods and rebate claims had been sanctioned, yet the classification issue and the resulting applicability of Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 were still unresolved. It therefore set aside the appellate order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing that classification be decided on merits without insisting on pre-deposit and after granting personal hearing. en-us Mon, 21 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Oct 2015 11:58:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264766 Classification of the goods remained undecided on merits, while the first appellate authority had focused on pre-deposit rather than the substantive dispute. The Tribunal noted that duty had been accepted on similar goods and rebate claims had been sanctioned, yet the classification issue and the resulting applicability of Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 were still unresolved. It therefore set aside the appellate order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing that classification be decided on merits without insisting on pre-deposit and after granting personal hearing. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 21 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264766