2009 (12) TMI 589 - HC - Central Excise

Adjudication - Direction given by the tribunal - the issue of admissibility of additional excise duty paid under ADE (TTA) Act for utilization towards payment of Basic Excise Duty - Held that - once the Tribunal has decided the Appeal giving certain directions to the lower authorities the lower authorities are bound to follow those directions unless the order of the Tribunal is reversed by the High Court or any stay is granted by the High Court against implementation of the order

Summary

Issues:
1. Failure of the jurisdictional Commissioner to adjudicate the issue as directed by the Tribunal.
2. Argument regarding pending Tax Appeal and its impact on implementing the Tribunal's order.
3. Legal obligation of lower authorities to follow Tribunal's directions unless reversed by the High Court or stayed.

Issue 1: Failure to Adjudicate as Directed:
The petitioner filed a petition under Article-226 seeking direction to the Commissioner to adjudicate an issue as directed by the Tribunal in its order dated 11-12-2006. Despite the Tribunal's directions, the Commissioner had not taken any action. The respondent argued that a Tax Appeal was pending, making it difficult to implement the Tribunal's order until the appeal was decided. However, the High Court emphasized that lower authorities must follow Tribunal's directions unless reversed by the High Court or stayed. The High Court, citing the decision of the Apex Court in Ghaziabad Development Authority v. Balbir Singh, clarified that in the absence of a stay, the order must be complied with before entertaining an Appeal/Revision.

Issue 2: Impact of Pending Tax Appeal:
The respondent contended that the pending Tax Appeal prevented the Revenue from implementing the Tribunal's order. The High Court, however, held that unless the High Court reversed the Tribunal's order or granted a stay, the lower authorities were obligated to follow the Tribunal's directions. The High Court highlighted that the mere filing of an Appeal/Revision did not excuse non-compliance with the Tribunal's order, emphasizing the need for compliance unless a stay was obtained or refused.

Issue 3: Legal Obligation to Follow Tribunal's Directions:
The High Court reiterated that once the Tribunal issued directions to lower authorities, they were bound to follow those directions unless the High Court reversed the order or granted a stay. Emphasizing the legal obligation to comply with Tribunal's orders, the High Court directed the jurisdictional Commissioner to adjudicate the issue as per the Tribunal's directions. The Commissioner was instructed to hear the petitioner, consider any explanations provided, and issue a final adjudication order expeditiously, preferably within three months from the receipt of the order or certified copy.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues of failure to adjudicate as directed, the impact of a pending Tax Appeal on implementation, and the legal obligation of lower authorities to follow Tribunal's directions unless reversed or stayed by the High Court.