TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Rejects Appeal Delay, Dispenses Pre-Deposit, Orders Fair Hearing</h1> <h3>BANJARA CEMENTS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUS. & C. EX., GUNTUR</h3> BANJARA CEMENTS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUS. & C. EX., GUNTUR - 2011 (263) E.L.T. 453 (Tri. - Bang.) Issues Involved:1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.2. Waiver of pre-deposit of dues.3. Allegations of clandestine manufacture and clearance of cement.4. Non-receipt of orders and violation of principles of natural justice.5. Imposition of penalties under various sections and rules.Detailed Analysis:1. Condonation of Delay in Filing the Appeal:The application for condonation of delay (COD) was filed by M/s. Banjara Cements Ltd. (BCL) and its Managing Director, Shri M.M. Reddy, citing the non-receipt of the impugned orders due to the closure of the factory and subsequent sale to financial institutions. The appellants argued that they received the impugned orders only on 6-6-2009, despite the orders being dispatched in December 2004. The Tribunal found that the orders were sent to an incorrect address and not received by the appellants. Therefore, the delay was not attributable to the appellants, and the application for condonation of delay was deemed unnecessary and rejected as infructuous.2. Waiver of Pre-Deposit of Dues:The appellants sought a stay on the pre-deposit of dues confirmed against them. The Tribunal noted that the impugned order was passed ex parte without providing the appellants an opportunity for a hearing. Given the circumstances and the violation of natural justice, the Tribunal dispensed with the requirement of pre-deposit to hear the appeals.3. Allegations of Clandestine Manufacture and Clearance of Cement:The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the original authority's order demanding duty of Rs. 17,24,138/- for clandestine manufacture and clearance of cement by BCL, along with applicable interest and penalties under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The findings were based on unaccounted receipt of raw materials and private records seized from the appellants. The Tribunal did not delve into the merits of these allegations, focusing instead on procedural fairness.4. Non-Receipt of Orders and Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:The appellants contended that they were not heard before the impugned orders were passed, violating the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal observed that the intimation letters for personal hearings were returned undelivered and that the orders were dispatched to an incorrect address. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the appellants were not given a fair opportunity to present their case and remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision following the principles of natural justice.5. Imposition of Penalties:Penalties were imposed on BCL and Shri M.M. Reddy under various sections and rules for the alleged clandestine activities. The Tribunal, considering the procedural lapses and non-receipt of orders, remanded the matter for a fresh adjudication, thereby setting aside the penalties imposed without a proper hearing.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the impugned orders were not served on the appellants in December 2004 but only in June 2009. Consequently, there was no delay in filing the appeals. The Tribunal remanded the cases to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision, ensuring adherence to the principles of natural justice. The stay applications and appeals were disposed of accordingly.
TaxTMI 