9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Interpretation of Section 28 of the Central Excise Act, 1962 and the validity of a show cause notice.
Judgment Summary: Issue 1: Compliance with Section 28 of the Central Excise Act, 1962 The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the appellant's argument that the show cause notice issued by the Dy. Commissioner did not have the requisite prior approval of the Commissioner as mandated by Section 28 of the Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) directed the Asst. Commissioner to issue a fresh notice under Rule 8 of the Customs Rules. The appellants contested this direction, claiming it exceeded the scope of the appeal. Details for Issue 1: Upon review, the Tribunal found that a show cause notice found to be invalid under Section 28 should result in setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. The Tribunal held that directing lower authorities to re-adjudicate by issuing a fresh notice was not in line with legal principles. The Commissioner (Appeals) should have focused on the validity of the proceedings and, having deemed them unlawful, should have set them aside. Consequently, the Tribunal expunged the direction to issue a fresh notice and granted relief to the appellant. This judgment clarifies the legal consequences of a show cause notice violating Section 28 of the Central Excise Act, emphasizing the need for adherence to legal principles in appellate decisions.
|
