2014 (2) TMI 1233 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of principles of natural justice - Utilization of procured raw materials and bogus exports shown with respect to goods shown to have been made out of non duty paid raw materials - delaying of adjudication proceedings - stay proceeding - Held that - It is observed from the case records that Advocate of the appellant vide letter dated 19/4/2006 asked for copies of certain documents from DGCEI before filing reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 31/1/2006. Though a copy of this letter was marked to Adjudicating Authority but the relied upon document copies were never asked from the adjudicating authorityfor more than seven years appellant slept and did not care to remind the adjudicating authority that certain documents are required and that that appellant has some duty towards filing of a written reply to the Show Cause Notice. Appellant also did not bother to intimate the field formations or the Adjudicating Authority regarding change in address for communication. It appears that appellant has indulged in delaying of adjudication proceedings As main appellant M/s Waghbakriwala Rayons is required to be put to certain conditions in order to ensure that appellant co-operate with the Adjudication proceedings. It is accordingly ordered that main appellant shall deposit an amount of ₹ 20 lacs (Rupees twenty lacs only) within a period of 8 weeks and report compliance to the Adjudicating Authority. On verification of the payment of above deposit, Adjudicating Authority will decide the case afresh in denovo adjudicating, after giving all the relied upon documents to the appellants and after extending them opportunity of personal hearing. It is clarified that this Bench has not expressed any opinion on merits and has kept all the issues open.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Improper utilization of procured raw materials and bogus exports.

Analysis:
The main appellant filed stay applications and appeals against an order confirming a demand and imposing penalties. The issue involved improper utilization of raw materials and bogus exports. The appellant's counsel argued for the matter to be remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority due to non-supply of requested documents and lack of intimation for personal hearings. The Revenue's representative contended that the appellant did not communicate a change of address to the Authority and had received previous communications indicating receipt mechanisms. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had not actively pursued the case for over seven years, failing to remind the Authority about required documents or update their address for communication. The Tribunal observed a pattern of delaying adjudication proceedings by the appellant. Referring to a similar case involving the appellant, the Tribunal ordered the main appellant to deposit a specified amount within a set timeframe to ensure cooperation with the Adjudication proceedings. The Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit a sum and comply with the Adjudicating Authority, which would then decide the case afresh, providing all relied-upon documents and an opportunity for a personal hearing. The Tribunal clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits and kept all issues open. The appeals were allowed by way of remand to the Adjudicating Authority.

This judgment addresses the issue of improper utilization of raw materials and bogus exports by the main appellant. The Tribunal considered arguments from both sides regarding procedural matters and the appellant's conduct during the adjudication process. The Tribunal found that the appellant had not actively pursued the case, leading to delays in the proceedings. Citing a previous case involving the same appellant, the Tribunal imposed a deposit requirement to ensure cooperation and directed the appellant to comply with the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing all relied-upon documents to the appellant and granting an opportunity for a personal hearing to maintain principles of natural justice. The Tribunal's decision to remand the case aims to facilitate a fair and thorough adjudication process, without expressing any opinion on the merits at this stage.