2008 (8) TMI 159

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Appellant. Gurpreet Singh for the Respondent. ORDER Rajesh Bindal, J. - The appellant ('the assessee') has filed the present appeal before this Court under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 ('the Act') against the order dated 20-11-2007, passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short, 'the Tribunal') in Excise Appeal No. 3891 of 2005-SM, r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....till 2003. Thereafter, the same was knocked down and sold as scrap vide Invoice No. 153 dated 28-5-2003. On the bill so raised, a sum of Rs, 32,000 was paid as duty. On 2-6-2004, the assessee was issued a notice to show cause as to why duty of Rs. 98,000 should not be recovered from him in terms of rule 12 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 (for short, 'the Rules') read with section 11A of the Act. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by the adjudicating authority was set aside. 4. The revenue went in appeal before the Tribunal, where reliance was placed upon rule 3(4) of the Rules. On the date when the case was taken up for hearing, due to unavoidable circumstances, the assessee could not be represented and the Tribunal in the absence of proper assistance accepted the appeal of the revenue and set aside the order passed by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m.-CESTAT) and CCE v. Teejan Foods (P.) Ltd. 2008-TIOL-588 (Bang.-CESTAT). He further submitted that even in the absence of counsel for the assessee in case the Tribunal was to take a view different than the view taken by it in other cases, the matter was required to be referred to a Larger Bench. 6. Learned counsel for the revenue could not dispute the fact that in other cases the Tribunal had....