2009 (2) TMI 679 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Compliance with Section 35(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in a review order.

Comprehensive Analysis:

1. Issue of Compliance with Section 35(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in the Review Order:
The case revolves around the compliance of the review order with Section 35(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Respondent's Counsel argued that the review order was not in line with the statutory provisions as it lacked proper dating and reasoning, citing the case law of CCE & C, Surat-I v. Shree Ganesh Dying & Printing Works. The Counsel highlighted that the review order was an abrupt conclusion without proper reasoning, making it void ab initio. The Appellant's Counsel, on the other hand, contended that the review was conducted appropriately by two authorities. Upon hearing both sides and examining the records, the Tribunal emphasized the necessity for a reasoned and speaking order, as mandated by the law. The Tribunal referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, stressing the mandatory nature of providing a reasoned opinion in such orders. It was concluded that the review order in question did not meet the legal standards as it failed to address the essential facts of the case, thereby not complying with Section 35B(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal on the grounds of non-maintainability due to the lack of compliance with statutory provisions.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the central issue of compliance with Section 35(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in the review order. The arguments presented by both parties, the Tribunal's examination of the case records, and the reference to relevant case law provide a comprehensive understanding of the legal reasoning behind the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.