2010 (10) TMI 250 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat credit - Penalty - none of the parties could bring to notice of the Bench about pendency of Revenue s appeal when the matter was disposed on 15-12-2008 - It is high time for Registry to exercise proper control for listing of the appeal of both sides so that there shall not be conflict in the decision while appeal of one side is taken up, depriving the other side to pursue its remedy - It is needless to mention that the High Courts have already repeatedly reminded that appeals cannot be disposed in peace-meal - Registry should not lose sight of clubbing of the appeals through effective control measure, so that there shall not be repetitive observations, like this, in future - Decided in the favour of the assessee

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 410/CE/APPL/JAL/2008
2. Disposal of stay application and appeal
3. Lack of notice on pendency of Revenue's appeal
4. Registry's control over appeal listing

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. 410/CE/APPL/JAL/2008 dated 26-8-2008. The same order was previously appealed by the assessee in Appeal case No. 2097/2008-SM (Br.), which was disposed of on 15-12-2008. The Tribunal noted that the appeal by the Revenue was infructuous as the Bench had already disposed of the assessee's appeal, and there was no need for penalty proceedings due to the reversal of cenvat credit.

2. The learned Counsel for the Respondent pointed out that the stay application for Appeal No. 2097/08 was disposed of separately, and the appeal itself was disposed on 15-12-2008. The Tribunal acknowledged that there was a lack of communication regarding the pendency of the Revenue's appeal when the matter was disposed of. It emphasized the need for proper control by the Registry to avoid conflicts in decisions and ensure both sides have the opportunity to pursue their remedies without interference.

3. The Tribunal expressed surprise that neither party nor the Registry had brought to notice the pendency of the Revenue's appeal when the assessee's appeal was disposed of. It highlighted the importance of avoiding piecemeal disposal of appeals and reminded the Bar to inform the Bench about any appeals filed by the opposing party. The order also instructed the Revenue to exercise effective control to ensure the Bench is aware of any pending appeals by the Revenue when the assessee's appeal is being heard.

4. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity for the Registry to implement measures for the effective listing and management of appeals to prevent similar oversights in the future. It stressed the importance of avoiding repetitive observations and ensuring a fair and organized process for the disposal of appeals. The order was dictated and pronounced in the open Court to address the issues raised and provide guidance for future proceedings.