2007 (4) TMI 518 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against allowing Modvat credit and reduction of penalty by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals).

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Kolkata involved the issue of Modvat credit and penalty reduction granted by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). The Revenue contended that the Respondent did not file relevant documents to claim relief before the appropriate authority. The ld. Commissioner accepted duty paid documents proved by commercial invoices, leading to the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal noted the submission that nine duty paying documents were filed before the adjudicating authority as early as 1994, but the order was passed in 2004 without proper justification. The Revenue failed to disprove duty payment or conduct an enquiry, rendering their case fatal. Reference was made to a previous revision decision highlighting the impropriety of delayed adjudication.

The Tribunal examined the impugned order's content in detail, emphasizing the denial of justice due to a significant delay in passing the order. The law mandates expeditious disposal of matters without unnecessary delays. In this case, a 10-year gap between hearing and the order's issuance, compounded by the transfer of the hearing authority, hindered the Respondent's ability to trace necessary documents. Citing the Supreme Court's precedent in Anil Rai v. State of Bihar, the Tribunal underscored the importance of timely adjudication. Additionally, a recent decision by the Bombay High Court, referencing Shri R.C. Sharma v. Union of India, reiterated that judgments passed after a prolonged period post-hearing are subject to being set aside. The principle that justice delayed is justice denied was highlighted, emphasizing the need for justice to not only be done but also be perceived to be done. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the Revenue's appeal, based on an empty formality that denied justice to the Respondent, was not sustainable.