2015 (12) TMI 1754 - AT - Central Excise

Maintainability of appeal - in the impugned order Redemption fine of 1, 82, 392/- has been imposed on M/s. Metro but in appeal memo the amount of redemption fine has been mentioned as 2 lakhs - Held that - the Committee of Commissioners has directed that the appeals is to be filed against M/s. Metro recording the fact that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has reduced the Redemption Fine to 1, 82, 392/- and no proposal for imposing penalty on M/s. Metro but in the Appeal Memo the amount of Redemption Fine is shown as 2, 00, 000/- and penalty on M/s. Metro is proposed the same is contrary to the Review Order. As the Revenue has not corrected the said discrepancies pointed out by the respondents therefore I hold that the appeal filed against M/s. Metro is defective hence not maintainable. The review order directs to file the appeal to the extent of demand of 28, 07, 0897- whereas in the appeal memo the amount of duty has been mentioned as 36, 88, 077/- and penalty was also sought to be imposed of 36, 88, 077/- - Held that - appeal is defective. On that account itself appeal is not maintainable against M/s. Pymen Cable India. In the Review Order there is no proposal to file the appeal against Shri Sandeep Garg and M/s. Ashok Cables Corpn - maintainability of appela against these persons - Held that - in the impugned order no penalty has been imposed on M/s. Metro. But M/s. Metro and Shri Sandeep Garg have challenged the impugned order before this Tribunal in Appeal Nos. E/120 & 121 of 2010 wherein this Tribunal held that no allegations are sustainable against them therefore no penalty is imposable on Shri Sandeep Garg accordingly - appeal dismissed. The Committee of Commissioners has proposed to file appeal against M/s. Ashok Cable Corporation therefore the prayer of the learned Counsel is not acceptable that the Committee of Commissioners has not proposed to file appeal against M/s. Ashok Cable Corporation - As there is no arguments advanced on the merits in this appeal the same is required to be heard on merits therefore the Registry is directed to list the said appeal for hearing on 22.01.2016. Application disposed off.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Appeal against M/s. Pymen Cables (India) Ltd., M/s. Ashok Cable Corporation, M/s. Metro Electrical Ltd., and Shri Sandeep Garg. Maintainability of appeals, discrepancies in appeal memos, imposition of penalties, and redemption fines.

Analysis:

1. The appeal was made by the Revenue against various entities based on an order partially allowing the appeal of M/s. Pymen Cables (India) and fully allowing the appeals of other respondents.

2. The respondent's counsel raised objections regarding the maintainability of the appeals due to discrepancies in the appeal memos. Specifically, issues were raised concerning the amount of redemption fines and penalties mentioned in the appeal memos compared to the Review Orders.

3. The respondent argued that the appeals against M/s. Pymen Cables and other individuals were defective and not maintainable due to discrepancies between the Review Orders and the appeal memos.

4. The Revenue's representative contended that the Tribunal could correct the discrepancies pointed out by the respondents, implying that the appeals should not be dismissed based on these grounds.

5. After hearing both parties, the Tribunal addressed the preliminary objections raised by the respondents regarding the Review Orders signed on different dates and dismissed the applications filed by the respondents.

6. Upon reviewing the Review Orders, the Tribunal found discrepancies in the appeal memos regarding the amount of redemption fines and penalties proposed, leading to the dismissal of the appeals against M/s. Metro and M/s. Pymen as defective and not maintainable.

7. The Tribunal also dismissed the appeal against Shri Sandeep Garg, the director of M/s. Metro, as no penalty was imposed on M/s. Metro, and previous Tribunal judgments found no sustainable allegations against them.

8. The appeal against M/s. Ashok Cable Corporation was directed to be listed for a hearing on a specified date as proposed by the Committee of Commissioners, despite objections raised by the respondent's counsel.

9. In conclusion, the Tribunal passed orders dismissing the appeals against M/s. Metro and M/s. Pymen as defective, dismissing the appeal against Shri Sandeep Garg on merits, and scheduling the appeal against M/s. Ashok Cable Corporation for a future hearing. All miscellaneous applications were disposed of accordingly.