1999 (7) TMI 557 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of confirmed duty and penalty.
2. Failure of the Commissioner to act according to the directions of the Tribunal.
3. Allegation of violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned order.

Issue 1: Waiver of Pre-Deposit and Stay of Recovery:
The appellant's advocate requested waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of confirmed duty and penalty amounting to Rs. 5,46,47,223 and Rs. 1 Crore, respectively. The Tribunal had previously observed that the Collector of Central Excise did not grant a personal hearing before passing the order and remanded the matter for de novo adjudication. Despite clear directions, the Commissioner did not adhere to the Tribunal's instructions, leading to multiple rescheduled hearing dates and lack of availability of the Commissioner during the final hearing. The appellant's advocate argued that the impugned order violated natural justice principles and Tribunal directions. The Tribunal concurred, set aside the impugned order, and allowed the appeal, directing the Commissioner to readjudicate the case after providing a copy of the investigation report and ensuring a clear hearing date.

Issue 2: Failure of the Commissioner to Act According to Tribunal's Directions:
The Commissioner, while passing the impugned order, failed to provide a copy of the investigation report conducted by the Department from Customs and DGFT offices, as directed by the Tribunal in its previous order. Moreover, the Commissioner was unavailable during a crucial hearing date, leading to a letter requesting the report being left with the Commissioner's PA. The Tribunal found that the impugned order completely disregarded the Tribunal's directions, concluding that it was passed in violation of natural justice principles and Tribunal directives. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, emphasizing the Commissioner's failure to comply with the Tribunal's instructions.

Issue 3: Allegation of Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The appellant's advocate alleged that the impugned order, issued by the Commissioner, violated the principles of natural justice and the Tribunal's directives. The Commissioner's failure to provide the investigation report, unavailability during a critical hearing, and disregard for the Tribunal's directions were highlighted as grounds for the alleged violation. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, deeming the impugned order to be in violation of natural justice principles and the Tribunal's directives. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, directed the Commissioner to readjudicate the case, and disposed of the appeal and Stay Petition accordingly.

This comprehensive analysis of the legal judgment highlights the issues raised, the arguments presented by the parties involved, and the Tribunal's decision based on the violation of natural justice principles and non-compliance with the Tribunal's directives by the Commissioner.