Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
M/S Ge Lighting (India) Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Customs (Import), ... on 10 July, 2001
ORDER J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)
1. On hearing both sides on the stay application, we find that the appeal itself could be taken up for disposal. We do so on granting waiver of pre-deposit of Rs. 31,43,027/- confirmed as duty and penalty of equivalent amount.
2. The Commissioner confirmed this duty in the belief that the appellant had contravened the provisions of Notification No. 203/92-Cus in as much as input stage credit had been availed in the manufacture of export goods. In the order, it has ben mentioned that the present appellant had not filed replies to the show cause notices nor had they appeared when summoned to do so.This lead the ld. Commissioner to pass the ex-parte order.
3. In the appeal memorandum it is claimed that the appellant had in fact filed due replies. It was claimed that the in admissible credit taken was reversed during the amnesty period and certificate to that effect had also been supplied.
4. We have seen the replies to the show cause notices placed on record. It appears that there was an error in communication whereby the replies filed by the present appellant were not placed before the ld. Commissioner. This has resulted in a wrong order having been passed. We thus allow the appeal and remand the proceedings back to the jurisdictional Commissioner. he shall give adequate opportunity to the appellant to state their case and then pass appropriate orders.
(Dictated in court)