Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellate authority could enhance penalty and order confiscation and redemption fine without serving notice under sub-section (3) of Section 35A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and without granting an opportunity of hearing.
Analysis: The appellate authority recorded that no show cause notice had been served under Section 35A(3) before enhancing the penalty and directing confiscation with redemption fine. Such non-service deprived the appellant of an opportunity to meet the proposed enhancement and amounted to violation of the principles of natural justice. In view of this procedural defect, the merits of the competing contentions on confiscability, penalty, and redemption fine were left for reconsideration by the appellate authority after issuing a fresh notice and hearing the appellant.
Conclusion: The matter was required to be remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for de novo consideration after fresh notice and hearing. The appeal succeeded on this procedural ground.
Ratio Decidendi: Enhancement of penalty or confiscatory relief by an appellate authority cannot be sustained unless the affected party is given the statutory notice and a fair opportunity of hearing; failure to do so violates natural justice and requires remand.