Appeal admitted after delay, penalty waiver sought due to investigating officer's dual role. Stay granted.

The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, and the appeal was admitted. The appellant deposited the duty element and sought waiver of pre-deposit of penalty amount, citing legal infirmity in adjudication where the investigating officer acted as the adjudicating authority. The issue of legal infirmity and identity of the adjudicating authority would be examined further. During the appeal pendency, a stay of penalty realization against an individual and waiver of penalty against the company were granted. The legality of the investigating officer becoming the adjudicating authority was to be scrutinized in the upcoming regular hearing.

---

---

Issues involved: Condonation of delay in filing appeal, waiver of pre-deposit of penalty amount, legality of investigating officer becoming adjudicating authority.

Condonation of delay in filing appeal: The application for condonation of 8 days' delay in filing the appeal was made on the grounds that the appellants believed the main appellants would handle the appeal, causing the delay. The delay was condoned with no objection from Revenue, and the appeal was admitted.

Waiver of pre-deposit of penalty amount: The appellant, M/s. Bansiwala Iron & Steel Rolling Mills, deposited the duty element and sought waiver of pre-deposit of penalty amount. It was argued that the adjudication suffered from legal infirmity as the investigating officer acted as the adjudicating authority, violating the principle that no one should judge their own cause. The Revenue contended that there is no legal bar for the investigating officer to become the adjudicating authority. The issue of legal infirmity in adjudication and the identity of the adjudicating authority were to be examined during regular hearing. Given the prima facie legal infirmity in adjudication and the duty element already deposited, a stay of penalty realization against Shri Saurabh Ghai and waiver of penalty against M/s. Bansiwala Iron & Steel Rolling Mills were granted during the appeal pendency.

Legality of investigating officer becoming adjudicating authority: The argument was raised that the investigating officer should not act as the adjudicating authority due to the principle of natural justice. The need to establish the identity of the adjudicating authority and whether the investigating officer and adjudicating officer were the same was emphasized. The issue of legality in this regard was to be further examined during the regular hearing.

Conclusion: The COD application for delay condonation and the Stay application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty amount were disposed of based on the orders regarding the legal infirmity in adjudication and the stay of penalty realization during the appeal pendency.

---