Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu
M/S. Madras Cements Ltd. vs Commr. Of Cex, Trichy on 25 June, 2001
Equivalent citations: 2001(77)ECC262
ORDER
Shri S.L. Peeran
1. This appeal arises from Order-in-Appeal No.41/97 (MDU) dated 18.2.97 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Tricky dismissing the appeal on the short ground of non compliance of Interim Stay order under the provisions of Section 35F of the Act. By Interim Order, the Commissioner had directed the appellants to pre deposit an amount of Rs.39,04,632/-.
2. Ld. Counsel points out that this amount had been debited in the PLA account under protest on 20.2.97 and its compliance reported. However, no notice was issued by the Commissioner (Appeals) before dismissing the appeal. The Tribunal as well as Madras High Court in the case of ITC & Ors. Vs. CCE [2000 (1) ECL 97 (Mas.) have held that dismissal without granting an opportunity of hearing is violative of principles of natural justice. Ld. Counsel submits that they had already debited the amount, however there was some confusion in informing the Commissioner in time which resulted in dismissal of the appeal. Therefore, he seeks for remand of the case so that he can establish that the Interim order has been complied with and the matter can be heard on merits.
3. Heard Ld. SDR. He submits that the appellants had not informed the Commissioner about depositing the amount and therefore the Commissioner is fully justified in dismissing the appeal under Section 35F of the Act.
4. On a careful consideration of the submission, we see from the grounds of appeal that the appellants have stated that they had credited the amount under Debit Entry No.751 in the PLA on 20.2.97 which was well within time. However, the counsel fairly submits before us that Commissioner was not informed in time which resulted in the dismissal of the appeal. The Madras High Court in the case of ITC & Others Vs. CCE [2000 (1) ECL 97(MAS.) have clearly held that dismissal of appeal under Section 35F without hearing is violative of principles of natural justice. In this case, the appellants contend that they have complied with the Interim order. If this be so, then the appeal is required to by heard on merits by the Commissioner. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and remand the case to Commissioner (Appeals) to verify about the pre deposit made and hear the appellants on merits after following the principles of natural justice and pass a speaking order. Thus the appeal is allowed by way be remand.
(Pronounced & dictated in open Court)