2012 (11) TMI 77 - AT - Central Excise

Notification No.29/2004 and 30/2004 - duty confirmed along with interest and penalties - Held that - The issue involved needs to be decided based upon the factual matrix, as to whether the appellant is able to co-relate the lot-wise receipt of the fabrics, processing done on it and subsequent sale of the same in order to come to a conclusion as to whether the appellant has availed the benefit of Notification No.29/2004 and 30/2004 correctly or not. As assessee produced a Chartered Accountant s certificate and submitted that he has gone through the entire records lot-wise and given the certificate of receipt and consumption of the fabrics in availment of benefit of Notification No.29/2004 and 30/2004 but the adjudicating authority has recorded in OIO that the appellant could not produce all the relevant records but had produced some of the records for verification. Thus the adjudicating authority, instead of verifying the some of the records and giving benefit to that extent to the appellant, had confirmed the entire demand as demanded by Show Cause Notice, without giving any benefit after verification of records which was produced - direct the lower authorities to conduct verification at the earliest and come to a conclusion, after following the principles of natural justice - in favour of assessee by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Stay petitions for waiver of pre-deposit of duty confirmed along with interest and penalties imposed by the adjudicating authority; Reconsideration of issue based on verification of purchases and sales invoices; Disposal of appeals based on narrow compass; Verification of records produced by the appellant; Decision on availing benefits of Notifications 29/2004 and 30/2004; Need for lower authorities to conduct verification and reach a conclusion; Directions for the appellant to prepare a statement for verification; Disposal of appeals by way of remand.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with stay petitions filed for the waiver of pre-deposit of duty confirmed along with interest and penalties imposed by the adjudicating authority. In the previous round of litigation, the matter was remanded back to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration based on the verification of purchases and sales invoices. The Tribunal found that the issue could be disposed of at the present stage as it lay in a narrow compass. The appellant claimed to have produced records for verification, but the adjudicating authority held that not all relevant records were submitted, leading to the confirmation of the demand. The appellant now produced a Chartered Accountant's certificate indicating lot-wise receipts and sales after processing, seeking a remand for reconsideration. The Tribunal considered the submissions and directed the appellant to prepare a statement indicating the receipt, processing, and clearances of materials for verification by the lower authorities.

The crux of the issue revolved around the appellant's ability to correlate lot-wise receipt of fabrics, processing, and subsequent sales to determine the correct availing of benefits under Notifications 29/2004 and 30/2004. The Tribunal emphasized the need for thorough verification by the lower authorities to reach a proper conclusion, highlighting the importance of cooperation from the appellant in producing all relevant records. A directive was issued for the appellant to provide a statement within four weeks detailing the material period's transactions for verification purposes. The lower authorities were instructed to conduct verification promptly and reach a conclusion following the principles of natural justice.

The judgment refrained from expressing any opinion on the case's merits, keeping all issues open for the adjudicating authority to reconsider afresh after conducting the necessary verification of records. Ultimately, the appeals were disposed of by way of remand, emphasizing the importance of proper verification and adherence to procedural fairness in reaching a conclusive decision.