2005 (9) TMI 424 - AT - Central Excise

Sequential Appeal Orders: Tribunal Invalidates Second Order, Upholds Initial Decision

The Tribunal held that once an appeal is disposed of by the appellate authority, there should be no further orders on the same matter. The Commissioner ... Appeal - Second order in same appeal Issues:1. Confirmation of duty demand based on notional interest on advances in assessable value.2. Appeal challenging the confirmation of demand.3. Disposal of appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) through two separate orders.Analysis:1. The original adjudicating authority confirmed the duty demand against the respondents, including notional interest on advances in the assessable value of goods. This decision was appealed, leading to the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the order and remanding the matter for further proceedings to establish the nexus between advances and sale price.2. Subsequently, the Commissioner (Appeals) issued a second order overturning the Assistant Commissioner's decision entirely and allowing the appeal. The Revenue contested this second order, arguing that the Commissioner (Appeals) had no basis to issue a second order after the initial appeal disposition.3. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue, noting that once an appeal is disposed of by the appellate authority, there should be no further orders on the same matter. The Tribunal emphasized that the first order issued in 1996 by the Commissioner (Appeals) was the valid one, disposing of the appeal initially. The second order in 1999 was deemed void ab initio as there was no existing order by the Assistant Commissioner to set aside at that time. Consequently, the Tribunal declared the 1999 order null and void and set it aside.This judgment clarifies the procedural aspect of appeal disposal and highlights the importance of adhering to the proper sequence of orders in administrative proceedings to ensure the validity and effectiveness of decisions.