https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770130 CESTAT Hyderabad remanded the case back to the Adjudicating Authority after finding procedural irregularities in penalty proceedings under Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The case involved allegations that eight companies were dummy units availing SSI benefits under N/N. 175/1986-CE. The Tribunal held that while co-noticees' demands were dropped, their evidence was improperly used against the appellant without their participation in remand proceedings. The Adjudicating Authority must issue fresh hearing notices to all parties covered in original show cause notices and adjudication order. en-us Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 May 2025 09:18:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770130 CESTAT Hyderabad remanded the case back to the Adjudicating Authority after finding procedural irregularities in penalty proceedings under Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The case involved allegations that eight companies were dummy units availing SSI benefits under N/N. 175/1986-CE. The Tribunal held that while co-noticees' demands were dropped, their evidence was improperly used against the appellant without their participation in remand proceedings. The Adjudicating Authority must issue fresh hearing notices to all parties covered in original show cause notices and adjudication order. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770130