2012 (10) TMI 227 - AT - Central Excise

Waiver of pre-deposit limitation alleged that appeals filed beyond normal period Held that - Appeals were filed within the normal period of limitation in the office of Additional Commissioner of Customs. Thereafter the appeal papers were transferred to the office of Commissioner (Appeals) on 3-2-2010 - Commissioner (Appeals) heard the appeal on merits and allowed the appellant to file written submission as evident from the letter dated 30-8-2010. It is not the case of Revenue that appeal papers were returned by the officer of Additional Commissioner, rather the appeal papers were transferred to the Commissioner (Appeals) - there was no delay in filing the appeals - remand the appeals for fresh decision to the Commissioner (Appeals) - appeals are thus allowed by way of remand

Summary

Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit of interest and penalties
2. Dismissal of appeals as time-barred

Analysis:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit of interest and penalties:
The applicant sought waiver of pre-deposit of interest and penalties against a demand of Rs. 25,81,911/-, as they had already deposited Rs. 26,04,644/-. The tribunal noted that since the duty had already been paid, the pre-deposit of penalties was waived for the hearing of the appeals.

2. Dismissal of appeals as time-barred:
The Commissioner (Appeals) had dismissed the appeals as time-barred, citing that they were filed beyond the condonable period under Section 128 of the Customs Act. The applicants contended that although the adjudication order was passed on 6-5-2009 and the appeal was filed on 6-7-2009, there was a mistake in filing the appeal papers in the wrong office initially. The appeal papers were later transferred to the correct office, and the appeal was heard on merits. The applicants argued that the issue of limitation was never raised by the Commissioner (Appeals) during the initial hearing. They relied on precedents to support their claim that the time spent in pursuing the matter before the wrong forum should be condonable. In light of these arguments, the tribunal found merit in the appellant's contention that there was no delay in filing the appeals. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision on merits without insisting on any pre-deposit, providing the appellants with a reasonable opportunity to present their defense.

In conclusion, the tribunal allowed the appeals by way of remand, disposing of the stay petitions. The decision highlighted the importance of ensuring that appeals are filed within the correct forum and emphasized the need for a fair hearing on merits without undue procedural obstacles.