2004 (11) TMI 495 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against demand of duty and penalty without individual bifurcation.

Analysis:
The case involved two appeals filed against an Order-in-Appeal confirming the demand of duty and penalty. The appellants argued that the demand was made without specifying the duty and penalty individually for each of them. The Commissioner (Appeals) had bifurcated the demand among different parties but failed to specify the duty and penalty for each individual assessee. The Tribunal noted that under Section 11A(2) of the Central Excise Act, the Adjudicating Authority must determine the duty due from the person to whom the show cause notice was issued. Since this was not done, the Commissioner (Appeals) could not have divided the duty amount among different parties. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to decide afresh, considering the submissions made by the appellants and providing a reasonable opportunity for a hearing. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to quantify the duty confirmed against each individual appellant and indicate the penalty separately in the new Adjudication Order. Both appeals were allowed by way of remand, emphasizing the need for individual bifurcation of duty and penalty.

This judgment highlights the importance of correctly specifying duty and penalty amounts for each individual assessee in cases involving demand of duty and penalty. It underscores the procedural requirement for the Adjudicating Authority to determine the duty due from the person to whom the show cause notice was issued, preventing arbitrary bifurcation of amounts among different parties. The decision to remand the matter for a fresh determination ensures fairness and adherence to legal provisions, emphasizing the principles of natural justice and due process in adjudication proceedings.