2013 (9) TMI 418 - AT - Central Excise

Stay - Demand of Ineligible Cenvat Credit appellant submits that the appellant was not issued any show-cause-notice for the effective defence of their case before the adjudicating authority. It is his submission that in the absence of any show-cause-notice and any reply thereof, the adjudicating authority s order of confirmed demand against the appellant of an amount of Rs. 64,54,590/- is incorrect. - Penalty Held that - if show-cause-notices are not issued and received by the appellant herein, they could not effectively represent their matters before the adjudicating authority. In the absence of reply to SCN and; reply any conclusion reached by the adjudicating authority is an order is in violation of principles of natural justice. The impugned order being in violation of principle of natural justice and is un-sustainable only on this ground. - Matter remanded back.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Stay petitions related to penalties and demands of Cenvat Credit imposed on various appellants.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addressed multiple stay petitions arising from the same original order. The penalties and demands of Cenvat Credit were confirmed by the adjudicating authority for all appellants.

2. For M/s. Jai Hanuman Dyg & Ptg Mills P. Ltd and Sh. Mukesh Agarwal, it was argued that the absence of a show-cause notice deprived them of the opportunity to defend their case effectively. The Tribunal found this to be a violation of natural justice principles, setting aside the penalties and demands for reconsideration.

3. Regarding the application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalties on Shri Sarin Chevli, discrepancies in the imposition of penalties were highlighted. The Tribunal directed a partial deposit and stayed the recovery pending further compliance.

4. The stay petition of Sh. M.M. Jariwala raised concerns about fake lease agreements and the applicability of certain rules. The Tribunal decided to delve deeper into the evidence during the final disposal of the appeal, imposing conditions and partial deposit requirements.

5. The penalties on M/s. Narayan Silk Mills and Sh. Hiren S. Bhatt were examined separately. The Tribunal agreed that penalties on the proprietor, Sh. Hiren S. Bhatt, were unsustainable. Partial deposits were ordered for both appellants, with a stay on recovery.

6. Lastly, the stay petitions of M/s. Pee Tee Silk Mills P. Ltd. and Purushottam Ramdhan Nandwani were dismissed due to lack of representation, indicating a lack of seriousness in pursuing the petitions.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment covers the issues related to penalties and demands of Cenvat Credit for various appellants, highlighting the Tribunal's considerations and decisions for each case.