2008 (12) TMI 577 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Enforcement of bond and bank guarantee to recover the amount due without proper information and opportunity to represent the case.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with an appeal against the enforcement of a bond and bank guarantee by the original adjudicating authority to recover an amount due. The Tribunal had previously set aside the demand under Rule 9(2) of Central Excise Rules, stating that demanding duty on the appellant, who was not a manufacturer of the raw material, was wrong in law. The Tribunal allowed the Revenue to enforce the bond if advised to do so. The appellant contended that they were not given an opportunity to represent their case, and the bonds were enforced without proper information or disclosure of details. The appellant also cited a previous case where it was held that the proper forum to enforce a bond is a Court of Law, not the adjudicating authority or Tribunal.

In this case, the duty demand arose due to the failure to account for a specific quantity of polyester staple fiber procured without payment of duty. The Tribunal had set aside the demand under Rule 9(2) and granted liberty to the Revenue to enforce the bond. However, after the Tribunal's order, the department simply enforced the bonds and bank guarantees without providing detailed information to the appellants. The appellants expressed their inability to locate the bonds executed by them for the amount payable to the department. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments and directed the original adjudicating authority to provide the details of the enforced bonds to the appellants, emphasizing the importance of transparency and due process in such enforcement actions.

The judgment highlights the significance of procedural fairness and transparency in enforcing bonds and bank guarantees to recover amounts due. It underscores the importance of providing opportunities for appellants to represent their case and ensuring that detailed information regarding the enforced bonds is disclosed. The Tribunal's decision to direct the original adjudicating authority to provide such details serves as a reminder of the principles of natural justice and procedural regularity in such matters.