2026 (1) TMI 1157

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ised Representative Mr. Sinha raised a point that value of appeal being less than of Rs.2,00,000/-, Tribunal in exercise of Section 35B(1) second proviso of the Central Excise Act, equally applicable to Service Tax matters in view of operation of Section 86(7) of the Finance Act, 1994 should refuse to admit the appeal for hearing since no special reason is cited or request is made for such hearing showing legal or factual necessity, when pendency of appeals involving high value is mounting up. 2.1 Learned Counsel for the Appellant Mr. Kshitij Kasi, with reference to decision of this Tribunal passed in the case of Asiatic Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Bhubaneswar-II, reported in 2006 (9) TMI 260 - CESTAT, Kolka....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Central Excise Act, 1944 and not in respect of admission of appeal. The Appellate Tribunal acquires powers to hear the appeals and make Orders under Section 35C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and not under Section 35B of the said Act. The discretion vested with the Appellate Tribunal to refuse or admit an appeal where the value of the appeal is below Rs.50,000.00/- (Rupees fifty thousand) under the second proviso to Section 35B(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, is not available to the Appellate Tribunal under Section 86(7) of the Finance Act, 1994 or any other provision of the said Act for refusing or admitting an appeal. No separate provision under the Finance Act, 1994 is incorporated for hearing appeals and making Orders by the Appell....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rders under this section, the Appellate Tribunal shall exercise the same powers and follow the same procedure as it exercises and follows in hearing the appeals and making orders under the Central Excise Act, 1944." (Underlined to emphasise) The comparative analysis of both the provisions of Central Excise Act and Finance Act would go to show that Section 35B of the Central Excise Act and Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994 are pari materia except sub-Section 1A dealing with transfer of pending matters to the Central Government, while Section 35C deals with hearing of the appeal, making orders, granting adjournment, making rectification of order, etc. and going by sub-Section 7 of Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994, it can be stated ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... statute and therefore, there is a requirement of hearing of the said appeal at the admission stage to justify its continuance and such hearing for making orders under Section 186 of the Finance Act, 1994 has to follow the procedure enumerated under Section 35B and 35C of the Central Excise Act, since sub-Section 7 to Section 186 of the Finance Act, 1994 dictates to follow the same procedure as the Tribunal exercises and follows in hearing appeals and making orders under the Central Excise Act, 1944. 5. I am, therefore, of the considered view that interim decision in Asiatic Enterprises, cited supra is distinguishable and therefore, there is no requirement to refer the matter to the Hon'ble President of the Tribunal for a Larger Bench op....