2012 (9) TMI 496 - AT - Central Excise

Non receipt of relied upon documents - Held that - On perusal of the reply to the show cause notice it can be find that the appellant had taken various grounds in defence against the show cause notice issued to them which both the lower authorities have not considered the said reply in its proper perspective - as the adjudicating authority has only recorded in the findings that the appellants were giving documents and hence relying upon the earlier order in original confirms the demands is defective as once an order in original is set aside by first appellate authority s order and remanded back to adjudicating authority, nothing survives except for the show cause notice. As the adjudicating authority should have decided the matter on the merits of the case from whatever records available with him, the said adjudication order is a non speaking order. Direction to the appellant to approach the lower authorities to take the copies of the relied upon documents to file further submissions.

Summary

Issues:
1. Non-receipt of relied upon documents by the appellant.
2. Failure of lower authorities to consider grounds of defense properly.
3. Lack of findings on merits of the case by adjudicating authority and first appellate authority.
4. Violation of principles of natural justice due to unreasoned orders.
5. Opportunity for appellant to access relied upon documents and make submissions.

Analysis:
1. The appellant raised the issue of non-receipt of relied upon documents before the first appellate authority, leading to a remand back to the original adjudicating authority for reconsideration. The appellant's counsel highlighted the request for documents in a letter dated 27.05.08 and pointed out the failure of authorities to address this issue adequately.

2. Both the adjudicating authority and the first appellate authority failed to provide findings on the merits of the case, instead focusing on the delivery of documents to the appellant. The lower authorities did not consider the appellant's defense properly, resulting in a non-speaking order that lacked reasoning and violated the principles of natural justice.

3. The lack of reasoned decisions by the lower authorities prompted the Appellate Tribunal to set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal by way of remand. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering all issues and ensuring a fair process based on natural justice principles.

4. In response to a query from the Bench, the appellant's counsel expressed the need for access to specific relied upon documents to present their case effectively. The Tribunal directed the appellant to approach the lower authorities for copies of the documents within a specified timeframe to facilitate further submissions and a personal hearing.

5. The Tribunal clarified that its decision to remand the case did not imply any opinion on the case's merits, keeping all issues open for reconsideration. By providing the appellant with an opportunity to access crucial documents and present their case, the Tribunal aimed to uphold the principles of natural justice and ensure a fair and thorough adjudication process.