2008 (6) TMI 530 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Imposition of penalty on the appellant without discussing their role in the case.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against Order-in-Original No. 14/2004 RP de novo dated 15-10-2004 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam. The appellant, M/s. Park Hotel, had entered into a contract with M/s. Interscape Mumbai for the supply of furniture. The initial order confirmed duty liability on M/s. Interscape Mumbai and imposed a penalty on both M/s. Interscape and M/s. Park Hotel. After multiple rounds of adjudication, the present appellant was not imposed with any penalty in the second adjudication order. However, in the impugned order, the Adjudicating Authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 on M/s. Park Hotel under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, without discussing their role in the matter.

Upon hearing both sides, the Tribunal found that the adjudication order was flawed as it imposed a penalty on the appellant without discussing their role in the case. The Tribunal concluded that the penalty imposed on M/s. Park Hotel was unjustified and not supported by law. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order of penalty and allowed the appeal with consequential relief. The operative portion of the order was pronounced in open court at the conclusion of the hearing.

In summary, the Tribunal found that the penalty imposed on M/s. Park Hotel was unjustified as the Adjudicating Authority failed to discuss their role in the case before imposing the penalty. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the penalty and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant.