https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779116 CESTAT allowed the appeal by way of remand, finding the impugned order did not decide the matter on merits due to initial failure to make the mandatory pre-deposit. As the appellant has now deposited the statutory pre-deposit (10% of the disputed amount under Section 35F, Central Excise Act, 1944), the Tribunal remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration and adjudication on merits. en-us Wed, 24 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Sep 2025 08:27:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779116 CESTAT allowed the appeal by way of remand, finding the impugned order did not decide the matter on merits due to initial failure to make the mandatory pre-deposit. As the appellant has now deposited the statutory pre-deposit (10% of the disputed amount under Section 35F, Central Excise Act, 1944), the Tribunal remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration and adjudication on merits. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 24 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779116