2001 (1) TMI 446

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to have a prima facie case. Therefore, we allow the present application unconditionally and proceed to dispose of the appeal itself finally. 2. The jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner had disallowed the Modvat credit of Basic Excise Duty of Rs. 12,20,921/- and Special Excise Duty of Rs. 61,046/- under Rule 57-I of Central Excise Rules and had also imposed penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the appellants under Rule 173Q of the Rules. Against this order of the Asstt. Commissioner, the party preferred an appeal to the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). The party also submitted an application for waiver of pre-deposit of the duty and penalty amounts and for stay of recovery thereof, pending the appeal. This application was disposed of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd of non-compliance with the direction for freezing of inputs-credit to the extent of Rs. 6 lakhs. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) passed the said order without looking into the merits of the case, nor affording any opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants. Hence the present appeal before us. 3. We have heard both sides. Ld. Advocate Shri M.H. Patil submits that the entire proceedings of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) are vitiated by negation of natural justice, and, therefore, the matter requires to be remanded. Ld. SDR Smt. Reena Arya for the Revenue has not contested the fact that the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice. 4. We have carefully examined the matter and considered t....