1999 (5) TMI 559 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Penalties imposed on appellants for colluding with manufacturers to avoid duty payment; Violation of principles of natural justice - failure to provide notice of personal hearing to appellants; Allegations of violation of natural justice by not providing clear hearing dates and relied upon documents to certain appellants; Allegations of not receiving notice of hearing by some appellants; Dispute over the adequacy of notice issuance by the Department; Failure to hear appellants before passing orders; Request for setting aside the impugned order and remand for fresh adjudication.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi addressed several issues arising from the imposition of penalties on appellants for colluding with manufacturers to evade duty payment. The primary contention raised was the violation of principles of natural justice due to the failure to provide notice of personal hearing to the appellants. It was argued that the Adjudicating authority treated the notice of hearing to the manufacturer as sufficient for the appellants, which was deemed incorrect as each co-noticee is entitled to a separate hearing in their defense before any adjudication order is passed, especially when penalties are involved.

Concerning specific appellants like M/s. Venus Industrial Corp. and M/s. Shivani Locks, it was highlighted that the notice of personal hearing provided ambiguous dates, leading to a violation of natural justice as the requested alternative date was not granted. Similarly, M/s. Kathuria & Sons claimed they did not receive any notice of hearing, thereby hindering their ability to present a defense against proposed penalties. M/s. Karan Steel also faced issues as they received an illegible show cause notice and were not provided with a clear copy or an opportunity for a hearing before the adjudication order was issued.

Moreover, M/s. Duggar Fibres pointed out that essential documents were not furnished along with the show cause notice, impacting their ability to respond adequately. M/s. Jammu Castings alleged that despite not receiving copies of relied upon documents, they were expected to participate in a hearing, thus emphasizing a violation of natural justice. The Department's argument regarding the adequacy of notice issuance was challenged by appellants who claimed non-receipt of hearing notices, leading to a lack of clarity on the actual distribution of notices.

After careful consideration, the Tribunal found merit in the appellants' claims of not receiving proper notice of hearings and the subsequent orders being passed without affording them a hearing. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the cases were remanded for fresh adjudication on the liability of appellants to penalties. The Jurisdictional Commissioner of Central Excise was tasked with hearing the appellants after providing copies of relied upon documents and ensuring a fair opportunity for them to present their case before passing fresh orders in accordance with the law.