Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. vs Cce on 6 September, 2006
Equivalent citations: 2006(112)ECC381, 2006ECR381(TRI.-DELHI), 2005(191)ELT521(TRI-DEL)
ORDER
R.K. Abichandani, J. (President)
1. This group of stay applications is placed by the Registry before the Division Bench for hearing under Section 35-F of the Central Excise Act. The learned Counsel for the applicants states that these matters do not involve any dispute in relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for the purpose of assessment. Therefore, since in these matters, the duty/ penalty/ interest involved do not exceed Rs. 10 lakhs in any of them, the matters are required to be heard by a Single Member Bench. The learned Counsel for the applicants submitted that when it was pointed out that the matters were not Division Bench matters, the registry referred to some order of the Tribunal directing that the cases in which interest dispute was involved, were to be placed before a Division.
2. The Registry has drawn our attention to the said order made on 12.6.2006 in E/Stay No. 976/2006. It appears from this order of the Single Member Bench that, the learned Member accepted the submission of the Counsel that since the issue in that matter was regarding interest sought to be demanded from the appellant, the matter was required to be transferred to the Division Bench.
3. The learned Single Member appears to have held that since the Single Member jurisdiction is limited to involvement of duty/ fine/ penalty, if it did not exceed Rs. 10 lakhs, the matters pertaining to disputes regarding interest were required to be heard by a Division Bench.
4. The proviso to Section 35-D(3) which has a bearing on matters which could be heard by a Member of the Appellate Tribunal sitting singly, reads as follows:
35D. Procedure of Appellate Tribunal--
(1)*** (2)*** (3) The President or any other member of the Appellate Tribunal authorized in this behalf by the President may, sitting singly, dispose of any case which has been allotted to the Bench of which he is a member where -
(a) in any disputed case, other than a case where the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for purposes of assessment is in issue or is one of the points in issue, the difference in duty involved or the duty involved; or
(b) the amount of fine or penalty involved does not exceed Rs. ten lakhs.
4.1 It will be evident from Section 35-D(3) that any disputed cases other than those excluded in Clause (a) can be heard by a Single Member provided the difference in duty involved or duty involved does not exceed Rs. 10 lakhs. Therefore, under Clause (a) of Section 35-D(3), the following cases cannot be heard by a Single Member -
1) Cases where the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty for the purpose of assessment is an issue;
2) Cases where determination of any question having a relation to the value of goods for the purpose of assessment is an issue
3) The difference in duty involved or the duty involved exceeds Rs. 10 lakhs
4) The amount of fine or penalty involved exceeds Rs. 10 lakhs.
4.2 The question of liability to pay interest will ordinarily arise in the context of disputes relating to duty and/ or penalty and will not stand excluded under Clause (a) of Section 35-D(3) unless there is dispute involved in relation to rate of duty, value of goods, or the duty and/or penalty exceed Rs. 10 lakhs. Mere disputes regarding interest are not excluded. Sub-section 3(a) and (b) of Section 35-D, clearly indicates that all disputed cases other than the excluded categories, can be heard by a member of the Appellate Tribunal sitting Single.
5. We accordingly, hold that these applications are required to be heard by the Single Member Bench. The registry will place these applications before the appropriate Single Member Bench.
(Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court on 6.9.2006)