2012 (10) TMI 38 - AT - Central Excise

Non discharge of duty liability by the appellant under the provisions of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 during the period April 2007 to April 2008 whereas assessee submits that it had discharged the duty liability as per the law but had failed to file the returns in time and there was some arithmetical error while calculating the duty paid - Held that - Calculations needs to be done by the adjudicating authority or by the jurisdictional authorities, hence matter needs to be considered by the adjudicating authority appreciating the claim of the appellant on the factual matrix. Matter remanded back to adjudicating authority without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case

Summary

Issues: Non-discharge of duty liability under Rule 8 of Central Excise Rules, 2002

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, the issue involved pertains to the non-discharge of duty liability by the appellant under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 for the period from April 2007 to April 2008. The appellant had failed to file returns in time, but later rectified this by filing the returns with an arithmetical error in duty calculation, which was presented before the first appellate authority. The Tribunal noted that the correctness of duty payment was not being delved into, emphasizing that the adjudicating authority or jurisdictional authorities need to undertake the necessary calculations. The Tribunal directed the matter to be reconsidered by the adjudicating authority, instructing the appellant to cooperate during the process and ensuring the principles of natural justice are followed. The judgment concluded by setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter back for fresh consideration, maintaining all issues open for review. The appeal was disposed of by way of remand, with the Tribunal refraining from expressing any opinion on the case's merits.