2003 (9) TMI 629 - AT - Central Excise

Adjudication - Show cause notice - Departmental clarifications - Binding nature - Strictures against Board

Summary

Issues:
1. Recovery of amount under Rule 57CC for utilizing inputs in exempted final product.
2. Lack of disclosure in the notice regarding specific inputs used in exempted goods.
3. Failure to consider appellant's contentions by the Asstt. Commissioner and Commissioner (Appeals).
4. Appeal against the order confirming demand and imposing penalty.
5. Lack of evidence for wrongly taken credit on duty paid inputs for exempted goods.

Issue 1: Recovery of amount under Rule 57CC
The appellant, engaged in manufacturing medicaments, faced a notice proposing recovery under sub-rule (2) of Rule 57CC for utilizing inputs with credit under Rule 57A in the production of exempted final products. The notice alleged the use of common raw materials without specifying details. The Asstt. Commissioner confirmed the demand and penalty, leading to the appeal.

Issue 2: Lack of disclosure in the notice
The appellant pointed out a major flaw in the notice for not disclosing specific raw materials used in exempted goods, hindering their defense. The Asstt. Commissioner failed to consider this crucial aspect and confirmed the demand without proper evidence or documentation.

Issue 3: Failure to consider appellant's contentions
Both the Asstt. Commissioner and Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appellant's contentions without proper analysis or basis. The Commissioner (Appeals) emphasized the need for separate accounts under Rule 3, which the appellant allegedly did not maintain, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

Issue 4: Appeal against order confirming demand and penalty
The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order based on the use of common raw materials without separate accounts. The appellant challenged this decision, highlighting the lack of specific details in the notice and the failure to provide evidence supporting the demand.

Issue 5: Lack of evidence for wrongly taken credit
The Tribunal noted the absence of evidence showing the incorrect credit taken on duty-paid inputs for exempted goods. The Asstt. Commissioner and Commissioner (Appeals) failed to address the appellant's arguments adequately, leading to the appeal's allowance and setting aside of the impugned order.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting the demand and the failure to address the appellant's contentions adequately by the lower authorities. The judgment highlighted the importance of proper disclosure in notices and the need for fair consideration of arguments in tax matters.