https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336070 The Tribunal remanded the case back to the adjudicating authority due to infirmities in the adjudication order, highlighting concerns about the authority's lack of independent analysis. The appellant's refund claim, although found valid, was credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund without sufficient justification. The Tribunal instructed the authority to conduct a thorough examination, allowing the appellant to present evidence supporting their claim that excess duty was not passed on to customers. The authority was directed to issue a reasoned order after providing a fair hearing, with a deadline set for the completion of adjudication proceedings by 31.03.2017. en-us Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 11 Dec 2016 18:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336070 The Tribunal remanded the case back to the adjudicating authority due to infirmities in the adjudication order, highlighting concerns about the authority's lack of independent analysis. The appellant's refund claim, although found valid, was credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund without sufficient justification. The Tribunal instructed the authority to conduct a thorough examination, allowing the appellant to present evidence supporting their claim that excess duty was not passed on to customers. The authority was directed to issue a reasoned order after providing a fair hearing, with a deadline set for the completion of adjudication proceedings by 31.03.2017. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336070