Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu
Sri Ramtirth International vs Commr. Of C. Ex. on 18 January, 1999
Equivalent citations: 1999(110)ELT813(TRI-CHENNAI)
ORDER V.K. Ashtana, Member (T)
1. In this application for COD, appellants contend that the appeal has been filed in time. However, there is a marginal delay on the basis of date of communication being 18-9-1998 and the appeal having been filed on 17-12-1998. Hence, the delay could be condoned.
2. Learned Consultant appearing for the appellants submits that this was a formal application as the belief held by the appellants, there is no delay in the matter.
3. Heard learned DR.
4. Considered. We notice that the appeal has been filed in time and as such the COD application is allowed.
5. As the matter lies on a short compass, the main appeal itself is considered after giving and stay of pre-deposit.
6. Learned Consultant Shri A.K. Vijayaraghavan submits that the Order-in-Original impugned goes beyond the scope of the show cause notice beyond their back in as much as that show cause notice dated 27-11-1997 vide para-6 thereof alleges that the said product namely 'Ramtirth Brahmi Oil' is classifiable under chapter sub-heading 3305.99 as a preparation of use on the hair and that noticees would not be eligible for exemption Notification No. 140/83 dated 5-5-1983. However, the impugned order-in-original has held that the product is classifiable under chapter sub-heading No. 3003.39 of Central Excise Act. He submits that this was not an allegation which was responded before the adjudicating authority. Therefore, the said decision has been taken behind their back.
7. Heard Ms. Aruna Gupta, ld. JDR who reiterates the order impugned.
8. We have carefully considered the submissions on both sides and records of the case. Since the matter lies on the short compass, we have to consider the main appeal itself and find that there is lot of merit in the ld. Consultant's submissions that order-in-original impugned has violated the principles of natural justice by holding the product classifiable under subheading which was not alleged in the show cause notice and neither was it made known to them at the time of personal hearing. Therefore, the decision has been arrived at in violation of principles of natural justice in as much as that noticees had not been given any opportunity to defend themselves vis-a-vis this classification under a new heading. Under these circumstances, we feel that interest of justice requires that order-in-original impugned may be set aside and matter remanded for fresh consideration by the original authority. Ordered accordingly. The appeal succeeds by way of remand.