Remand for fresh consideration where cess-payment evidence surfaced later and the appellate order was passed ex parte.

Liability to pay Iron Ore Cess and the related penalty was left open for fresh appellate consideration because the appellant produced payment challans and a supplier letter that had not been before the lower authorities, having been received only after the adjudication order. As the Commissioner (Appeals) had passed an ex parte order, the existing material was not sufficient for final disposal without giving both sides an opportunity to adduce evidence. The appellate order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for de novo decision, with liberty to produce evidence and without insisting on pre-deposit. All issues on merits remained open.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was liable to be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration in view of the claim that the cess had already been paid and supporting documents were not earlier produced.

Analysis: The dispute concerned liability to pay Iron Ore Cess under the relevant cess law and the connected penalty under the Central Excise Act. The appellant produced a letter and challans showing payment of the cess by the supplier, and explained that these documents were not before the lower authorities because they were received after the adjudication order. The appellate order was also passed ex parte. In these circumstances, the existing material required reconsideration by the appellate authority with an opportunity to both sides to adduce evidence.

Conclusion: The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh decision with liberty to produce evidence and without insisting on pre-deposit.

Final Conclusion: The controversy was reopened for de novo appellate consideration, while all issues on merits were kept open.

Ratio Decidendi: Where relevant evidence was not earlier before the authority and the appellate order was ex parte, remand for fresh consideration with opportunity to produce evidence is justified.

---