Kothari Filaments & Anr vs Commr.Of Customs (Port) Kolkata & Ors on 16 December, 2008
4. We have carefully considered the submissions made from both the
sides and perused the records. Ongoing through the entire facts of the
case, relevant legal provisions and decisions relied upon by the appellant
in paragraph 2 above, prima facie, we are of the view that the issue of non-
payment of central excise duty on final goods on debonding is settled in
favour of appellant. Also, prima facie, the other issue that no duty is
payable on semi-finished goods is settled in favour of appellant in terms of
decisions relied upon in paragraph 2 above. However, it is seen that
although the Learned Commissioner took verification report dated
20.01.2017 from jurisdictional office, the same was not furnished to the
appellant. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kothari Filaments v.
Commissioner -- 2009 (233) E.L.T. 289 (S.C.) has held that documents
relied upon in the adjudication order are required to be supplied to the
appellant in terms of principles of natural justice. We find considerable force
in appellant's submission that question of demand of excise duty does not
arise if goods are exported which fact can be verified from the CA certificate
6 E/11078/2017-DB
dated 15.11.2016 which was submitted before the Learned Commissioner,
however, the same was not considered. The same needs to be considered.
4.1 In the above fact, we are of the view that the matter needs to be
reconsidered by the Learned Commissioner/ adjudicating authority by (i)
providing the letter dated 20.01.2017 issued by the jurisdictional Assistant
Commissioner to the appellant; and (ii) considering the CA certificate dated
15.11.2016 to ascertain claim of export of goods, along with other evidence
which may be put on record by the appellant. We direct the adjudicating
authority to give the said letter dated 20.01.2017 to the appellant well in
advance and to grant an opportunity of hearing before passing reasoned
order in the matter. While deciding the matter the decisions relied upon by
the appellant are to be considered.