https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371176 The appeal was allowed by the Tribunal, remanding the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision. The Tribunal found that the appellant had complied with the requirements of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, despite the initial dismissal by the Commissioner (Appeals) based on non-compliance. The Commissioner (Appeals) was instructed to assess the merits of the case and issue a reasoned order after considering the available records and submissions, granting the appellant an opportunity to be heard before a final decision is made. en-us Fri, 28 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Dec 2019 14:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371176 The appeal was allowed by the Tribunal, remanding the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision. The Tribunal found that the appellant had complied with the requirements of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, despite the initial dismissal by the Commissioner (Appeals) based on non-compliance. The Commissioner (Appeals) was instructed to assess the merits of the case and issue a reasoned order after considering the available records and submissions, granting the appellant an opportunity to be heard before a final decision is made. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 28 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371176