9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Compliance with remand order by lower appellate authority regarding recovery of duty already refunded to an assessee without recourse to specified sections of Customs Act and Central Excise Act. Analysis: 1. The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, CHENNAI arose in the second round after the Commissioner (Appeals) passed an order following the Tribunal's direction in the first round of litigation. The Tribunal had instructed the Commissioner (Appeals) to re-examine the dispute between the assessee and the Revenue based on the Tribunal's observations from the previous order. 2. The original authority had sanctioned a refund of duty to the assessee, which was subsequently reviewed by the Commissioner under the Customs Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the departmental appeal against the refund order, leading the assessee to approach the Tribunal. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to consider the legal issue based on the Tribunal's previous observations, emphasizing the need to follow those directions. 3. The assessee contended that the lower appellate authority did not adhere to the Tribunal's remand order. The Tribunal had previously ruled on the question of invoking specific sections for recovery of duty already refunded, distinguishing it from a Supreme Court judgment. The Tribunal highlighted its stance that the Revenue must issue a show-cause notice within the prescribed period instead of seeking recovery under different sections. 4. After considering the submissions and finding that the lower appellate authority did not address the issue as directed, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order. The Tribunal emphasized that the lower appellate authority should have followed the Tribunal's clear directives and acknowledged that the Revenue did not appeal against the remand order. Consequently, the impugned order was overturned, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed. 5. The Tribunal concluded that the impugned order was passed without considering the established legal position, leading to the decision to set it aside. The Tribunal's detailed analysis and clear instructions were not followed by the lower appellate authority, necessitating the Tribunal's intervention to rectify the situation and uphold the rule of law. 6. In light of the circumstances and the failure of the lower appellate authority to apply the law correctly, the Tribunal had no choice but to overturn the impugned order and allow the appeal of the assessee, emphasizing the importance of adherence to legal directives and precedents in such matters.
|
