Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Monnet Industries Ltd. vs Commissioner Of C. Ex. on 29 May, 2002
Equivalent citations: 2003(154)ELT649(TRI-DEL)
ORDER G.R. Sharma, Member (T)
1. Arguing the five stay petitions Shri L.P. Asthana along with Shri Rajesh Chibber, ld. Counsels submit that in these cases duty amounting to Rs. 1,09,73,000/- has been demanded and a penalty of an equal amount has been imposed on the company and of Rs. one crore on M/s. Baba Vishwakarma Engg. Co. Pvt. Ltd., Rs. 10 lakhs on Shri J.P, Lath, Whole Time Director of M/s. Monnet Industries Ltd., Rs. 10 lakhs on Shri B.B. Thapar, Asstt. General Manager of M/s. Monnet Industries and Rs. 10 lakhs on Shri Jugal Kamboj. They submit that out of the amount of duty, the applicants have already deposited a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs. They, therefore, prayed that further pro-deposit of duty and penalty may be waived.
2. We have heard Shri L.P. Asthana and Shri Rajesh Chibber, ld. Counsels for the appellant and Shri Mewa Singh, ld. DR for the Revenue. Since an amount of Rs. 50 lakhs has already been deposited by the applicant, further pre-deposit of duty and penalty is waived. With the consent of both the parties, we proceeded to decide the appeal itself.
3. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Sugar & Molasses. Central Excise Officers conducted enquiries consequent upon the search of their factory premises, a SCN was issued to them asking them to explain as to why duty should not be demanded from them and why penalty should not be imposed. The SCN was issued on 30-4-2001. Immediately on receipt of the SCN, the appellants requested to supply of various relied upon documents and also requested for supply of non-relied upon documents seized by the Department. Some documents were supplied by the authorities. A letter was received by the appellant on 21-11-2001 fixing the date of hearing of SCN on 28-11-2001. Since it was a short time, the appellant requested the ld. Commissioner for extension of time so that they could submit a reply to the SCN as also appear for the personal hearing. However, ld. Commissioner passed the order dt. 30-11-2001 confirming demand of duty of Rs. 1,09,73,600/- and imposing penalty of an equal amount on M/s Monett India Ltd. and different penalties on others.
4. Arguing the case for the appellants Shri L.P. Asthana, ld. Counsel submits that there was denial of natural justice inasmuch as the appellant did not have an opportunity of even submitting proper reply as also did not have an opportunity of presenting their case and explaining the documents. He submits that the order passed by the authorities is an ex parte order and that there has been violation of the principles of natural justice. He prays that the matter may be remanded to the authorities below.
5. Shri Mewa Singh, Ld. DR has no objection.
6. On careful consideration of the submissions made, we note, that the appellant did not have an opportunity of presenting the case in defence. In the circumstances, we consider it a fit case for remand. The matter is, therefore, remanded to the Commissioner concerned with the direction that he will examine the papers afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity to the appellant for explaining their case and explaining the documents and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The impugned order is set aside and the appeals are allowed in the above terms by way of reunand.