Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Bhagwati Steel Industries vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 11 March, 2014
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
PRINCIPAL BENCH, COURT NO. III
Excise Appeal Nos. 50254, 50255 & 50256 of 2014
Excise Stay Application Nos. 50330, 50332 & 50334 of 2014
Excise Misc. Application Nos. 50331, 50333 & 50335 of 2014
[Arising out of order No. IV (16) Hqrs. /TRC/Compounded Levy/11/2013 / 8401 dated 20.12.2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh ]
For approval and signature:
Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)
1
Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No
2
Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
No
3
Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
Seen
4
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
Yes
M/s. Bhagwati Steel Industries Appellants
The Pepsu Steel Rolling Mills
Pritam Singh Hunjan & Bros
Vs.
Commissioner of Central Excise Respondent,
& ST, Chandigarh I Appearance:
Shri Sudhir Malhotra , Advocate for the Appellants Shri R K Mishra, AR for the Respondent Date of Hearing /Decision: 11.3.2014 ORDER NO . FO/ 51015-51017/2014-SM(Br) Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa:
The Misc. applications are for early disposal of the stay petitions as also the appeals. I find that all three appellants have deposited the entire duty amount and the dispute relates to only interest and penalty.
2. I find that the Assistant Commissioner vide his impugned letters communicated the decisions of the Commissioner to the appellants intimating that they are liable to pay interest as also are liable to penalty.
3. I find that the Tribunal in the case of Bhagwati Gases Ltd. vs. CCE, Jaipur I [2008 (226) ELT 468 (Tri-Del)], an identical situation was considered and the said communication by the Assistant Commissioner conveying the order of the Commissioner was set aside and the matter was remanded to him for passing a fresh order on merits.
4. Inasmuch as in the present case, Commissioner has taken the decision only on file which stand conveyed by the Assistant Commissioner and such decision was one sided decision without putting the appellants on notice, I set aside the communication of the Assistant Commissioner and direct the Commissioner to decide the issue afresh after following the principles of natural justice.
5. All three Misc. applications, stay petitions and appeals get disposed of in the above manner.
(Dictated & pronounced in the open Court )
( Archana Wadhwa ) Member(Judicial)
ss
??
??
??
??
2