https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770130 Allegations that certain units were dummy units for SSI exemption purposes under Notification No. 175/1986-CE were being considered after multiple rounds of adjudication, with prior cross-examination and Tribunal observations forming part of the record. The Tribunal noted that co-noticees had not participated in the denovo proceedings despite notice, while the adjudicating authority had proceeded on the available evidence and confirmed demand and penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. In the interest of justice, the matter was remanded for fresh decision after issuing notice to the appellant and all co-noticees and after considering their defence and evidence. en-us Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 May 2025 09:18:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770130 Allegations that certain units were dummy units for SSI exemption purposes under Notification No. 175/1986-CE were being considered after multiple rounds of adjudication, with prior cross-examination and Tribunal observations forming part of the record. The Tribunal noted that co-noticees had not participated in the denovo proceedings despite notice, while the adjudicating authority had proceeded on the available evidence and confirmed demand and penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. In the interest of justice, the matter was remanded for fresh decision after issuing notice to the appellant and all co-noticees and after considering their defence and evidence. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770130