2005 (4) TMI 377

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....7-2-2005 that this case also should be placed before that Bench along with the connected matter. 2. This application is filed by the Commissioner praying for the stay of the impugned order-in-appeal dated 14-6-2004 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) to the extent it imposes a penalty of Rs. 30,000/- on the respondent. 3. We notice from the order-in-appeal that there is absolutely no reference to the reasoning and findings of the Assistant Commissioner given in the context of the order of penalty imposed on the respondent in the Order-in-original. In paragraph 20 of the order-in-original, it was noted that on verification of the stocks, as per RG-23D register of the dealer, it was found that there was no stock available with the regi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d in their sale invoices, but, he had substituted the material with that procured from the open market. 4. Despite a clear case in the show cause notice and consideration of the relevant aspects by the Assistant Commissioner for reaching the conclusion that all the dealers had intentionally and wilfully issued the fake invoices to avail of the Cenvat facility, the Appellate Commissioner has not cared to consider any of the aspects that had bearing on the penalty that was on the respondent. In fact, his reasoning that followed his declaration, that he had carefully examined the case record, is nothing but conjectural. A prima facie case is, therefore, made out for staying the impugned order to the extent to which it is challenged. It is m....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al is incidental and ancillary. It was held that an express grant of statutory power carries with it, by necessary implication, the authority to use all reasonable means to make such grant effective. The Supreme Court, in the case of Union of India v. Paras Laminates (P) Ltd., reported in 1990 (49) E.L.T. 322 (S.C.) has held that the Tribunal functions as a court within the limits of its jurisdiction and being a judicial body, it has all those incidental and ancillary powers which are necessary to make fully effective the express grant of statutory powers. It was held in paragraph 8 of the judgment that, certain powers, are recognised as incidental and ancillary not because they are inherent in the Tribunal, nor because its jurisdiction is ....