Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Jai Bhavani Ssk Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 23 November, 2001
JUDGMENT Gowri Shankar, Member (T)
1. On the last occasion, the counsel for the applicant was asked to furnish full details of the appeals stated to have been filed before the Tribunal against the Commissioner. He is to day absent and applicant is unrepresented.
2. We are therefore left with no alternative but to proceeds on the basis of the document on record.
3. The Commission (Appeals) dismissed the appeal before him for failure by the applicant to deposit Rs. 70,000/- representing the entire duty of Rs. 65,000/- and a penalty of Rs. 5000/-. The duty was demanded by the Additional Commissioner on the ground that the assessable value of the molasses that the applicant manufactured and cleared should be Rs. 1000/- per ton.
4. In the order, the Additional Commissioner records that he was adjudicating the case afresh on a remand by the Commissioner (Appeals) who had ordered the amount taking into consideration the price of comparable goods and if such prices are not available to decide the price on the basis of cost of production and margin of profit. He records that the applicant had stated before him that no price of comparable goods are available. He has therefore confirmed the demand by arriving at on the basis of the cost of production.
5. The ground in the stay application that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not hear the applicant before passing the order is not acceptable. The Commissioner (Appeals) has passed a reasoned order.
6. However, having regard to the facts, we take up the appeal itself for disposal. We order that on the applicant depositing Rs. 45,000/- before the Commissioner (Appeals) towards duty and penalty, within a month from the receipt of this order, he shall hear and dispose of the appeal on merits. If the applicant fail to deposit the amount, the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) shall stand dismissed.