2006 (12) TMI 413 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether demands under Section 3A of Central Excise Act are sustainable post its deletion without a saving clause?
2. Maintainability of appeals and confirmation of demands in pending cases after the deletion of Section 3A.

Analysis:

1. The appeals arose from orders confirming demands under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act without a saving clause post its deletion by the Finance Act 2001. The appellant contended that the demands were not sustainable due to the deletion of Section 3A. The appellant relied on previous judgments by the Tribunal, arguing that the deletion of Section 3A without a saving clause rendered the demands invalid. The counsel emphasized that the Tribunal still had the power to hear appeals despite the deletion of Section 3A.

2. The Departmental Representative argued that the appeals were not maintainable post the deletion of Section 3A, and the pending appeals could not be heard. It was contended that since demands could not be confirmed under Section 3A, the pending appeals were deemed confirmed, and recovery could proceed. The DR highlighted that previous judgments did not address this specific argument and requested consideration of this aspect.

3. Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal observed that previous judgments had addressed the issue comprehensively. It was established that in the absence of a saving clause for Section 3A, demands could not be confirmed in pending cases. The Tribunal reiterated that the deletion of Section 3A did not affect the appellants' right to appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and allowed the appeals, following the precedent set by previous judgments and upholding the appellants' right to appeal despite the deletion of Section 3A.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the key legal issues, arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's decision based on established legal principles and precedents.