2005 (7) TMI 206 - AT - Central Excise

CESTAT Mumbai: Duty Demand Order Set Aside, Emphasizes Singular Liability

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai set aside an order directing duty demand on two persons, emphasizing duty is leviable on 'a person' in singular ... Liability of the manufacturer - use of the word 'a person' in levy of duty (singularity of liability) - joint and several liability - re-determination of liability after hearingLiability of the manufacturer - use of the word 'a person' in levy of duty (singularity of liability) - joint and several liability - Validity of the finding that two entities were jointly and severally liable to pay the duty - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal found that the duty demand had been directed at two persons without arriving at specific charges as to on whom the determination of liability should be effected and where liability should rest. The wording of the levy contemplates duty leviable on 'a person' who manufactures excisable goods, the word being used in singular and not plural. Consequently, the impugned conclusion recorded in paragraph 15 that both entities are jointly and severally liable could not be upheld. The Tribunal therefore set aside that finding and directed a fresh hearing of the appellants with re-determination of liability and all issues left open for adjudication. [Paras 15]Paragraph 15 of the impugned order holding both entities jointly and severally liable is set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh hearing and re-determination of liability and all issues.Final Conclusion: The appeal is allowed by setting aside the finding of joint and several liability and remanding the matter for re-hearing and re-determination of liability and all issues. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai set aside an order where duty demand was directed on two persons without specific charges, stating duty is leviable on 'a person' in singular form. The appeal was allowed as remand for re-determination of liability, with all issues kept open.