https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45315 The court upheld the Collector of Central Excise's order classifying products as fungicides or disinfectants, emphasizing that not every matter requires cross-examination of experts. It highlighted that the necessity of cross-examination depends on the case's circumstances and that absence of such opportunity may not invalidate a decision if no prejudice is caused. The court directed the petitioner to appeal to the Customs, Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal within four weeks, allowing for dispensing with pre-deposit due to business closure. It stressed the importance of due process and administrative efficiency in such cases. en-us Mon, 24 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:41:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45315 The court upheld the Collector of Central Excise's order classifying products as fungicides or disinfectants, emphasizing that not every matter requires cross-examination of experts. It highlighted that the necessity of cross-examination depends on the case's circumstances and that absence of such opportunity may not invalidate a decision if no prejudice is caused. The court directed the petitioner to appeal to the Customs, Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal within four weeks, allowing for dispensing with pre-deposit due to business closure. It stressed the importance of due process and administrative efficiency in such cases. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 24 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45315