Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
M/S. Wox Coolers P. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise & ... on 23 February, 2001
ORDER G.N. Srinivasan, Member (J)
1. In this appeal the learned counsel Shri N.K. Kapoor, advocate, pleads before me that even though he has shown the duty paying documents to the adjudicating authority, the Commissioner had not discussed the same at all in the impugned order.
2. Show cause notice had been issued on 26.4.1995 charging the appellants that they have manufactured 358 ET coolers during 14.3.1993 to 10.5.1993 and cleared the same without payment of duty. Value of the said goods was Rs.10,02,400/- involving duty of Rs.1,00,240/-. The defence statement was that what is contained in the hand-book which has been seized has no relevance to the facts of the case. It is alleged by the assessee that the department has not proved that who wrote the hand-book. The assessee pleads before me that statement has been filed showing clearances of coolers with duty paying documents which has not been considered by the Commissioner.
3. Shri J.M. George, learned JDR, adopts the reasoning of the lower authority.
4. I have considered the submissions. In paragraph 11 of the impugned order it is stated as follows:-
"11. The Noticee further in their reply Dt. 31.10.95 stated that during the period 1.4.93 to 10.5.93, they have availed exempting upto 30 lakh and thereafter they have started paying the duty as the applicable rates. They further pleaded that out of 358 coolers, 315 coolers were cleared on valid duty paying documents and the remaining 43 coolers were belonging to M/s. Wox Sales (P) Ltd, Nagpur which were received from M/s. Suresh Agencies, Amalner Distt. Jalgaon vide their letter Dt. 7.6.92 and were stored at the Goodman of M/s. Wox Sales (P) Ltd., Chhindwara Road, Nagpur and were sold from time to time to their customers and thus the noticee pleaded that there is no suppression of facts on their part in the production and clearance. All the coolers were cleared on payment of duty and therefore there is no duty liability nor any penalty imposable on them. Personal hearing was fixed on 31.8.95, 28.9.95, 5.10.95 but could not be held as these dates. However the same was held on 31.10.95. Shri S. N. Kapoor Advocate and Shri C.P. Kapoor appeared on behalf of Noticee and reiterated the arguments made in written submission. In addition the noticee gave further submission on 31.10.95 that the noticee had got registered central excise premises at two dealers outside the limit of municipal corporation Nagpur again he reiterated that it so happened some time that the trucks carring coolers within the municipal limit used to go outside the municipal limits for filling diesel as it was cheaper and use to come back. Further they pleaded that the excise authority have taken the entries in regard to such trips of the trucks carring coolers and that the unit outside the municipal limit did not have any manufacturing activity. They gave chart showing removal of coolers together with gatepass numbers, vehicle numbers etc. to substantiate payment of duty on the coolers covered by show cause notice. They submitted zerox copies of invoices also."
5. The impugned order does not fully discuss the payment of cental excise duty except in a peripheral way the same is referred to in para 15 of the order. I feel it is necessary in the interest of justice that the adjudicating authority has to look into the submission made by the assessee in this case, reconsider the matter and come to the determination of the issue with a well reasoned order after following the principles of natural justice. The impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded. The assessee to cooperate with the adjudicating authority.
(Dictated in Court)