2005 (2) TMI 679 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Whether the appeal can be filed by Revenue on a point not mentioned in the show cause notice or decided by the Adjudicating Authority in Order-in-Original.

Analysis:
The case involved three appeals by M/s. Amar Coach Builders & Ors regarding the classification of goods under the Central Excise Tariff Act. The appellants fabricated bodies on chassis falling under Heading 87.02 and cleared goods under this heading with partial exemption. The show cause notices were issued for denying the benefit of the exemption due to lack of evidence on duty payment for chassis. The Dy. Commissioner dropped the duty demand, but the Commissioner directed appeals based on a new classification under Heading 87.07, citing previous court decisions. The appellants argued that the review went beyond the show cause notice, which is impermissible. The Tribunal previously held that review proceedings cannot exceed the grounds in the notice.

The Revenue contended that the Supreme Court decision classified bodies under Heading 87.07, making appellants ineligible for the exemption under Heading 87.02. The department justified filing the appeal based on this new classification.

The Tribunal considered both arguments and found that the show cause notices did not mention the classification under Heading 87.07, and the Adjudicating Authority dropped the demand based on the evidence presented. Filing an appeal on a new ground not specified in the notice is impermissible as per settled law. The Tribunal referenced a previous case to support this principle. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the orders confirming the duty demand based on the new ground and allowed the appeals.

This judgment clarifies the principle that appeal grounds cannot introduce new issues beyond those raised in the show cause notice. It upholds the importance of adherence to the scope of notice in maintaining procedural fairness and preventing surprise arguments during appeal proceedings.