2015 (10) TMI 1171 - AT - Central Excise

Validity of impugned order - Three dates of hearing granted with one notice only - Held that - Adjudicating authority proceeded on the basis that three opportunities for personal hearing had been granted and no further adjournment shall be granted as per proviso to Section 33A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. We find that three dates of hearing were granted by one notice, which is not proper as per the proviso to Section 33A of the said Act, 1944 as held by the Tribunal in the case of Imtiaz Ahmedad (2014 (12) TMI 767 - CESTAT BANGALORE (LB)). We have also considered that the Appellant was under BIFR. - Impugned order is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues: Violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned order, failure to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice, improper grant of opportunities for personal hearing, consideration of the appellant's status under BIFR.

In this case, the appellant argued that the impugned order was passed in violation of natural justice principles as the personal hearing was fixed for three dates by one notice, contrary to Section 33A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant, being under BIFR, could not file a reply to the Show Cause Notice and had debited the entire duty amount. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision and found the grant of three dates by one notice improper, considering the appellant's BIFR status.

The Revenue's representative contended that the appellant failed to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice and did not attend the personal hearing. The representative disputed the appellant's claim of debiting the entire duty amount. The impugned order was set aside by the Tribunal due to the improper grant of hearing dates and the appellant's BIFR status. The matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for proper hearing opportunities and cooperation from the appellant's side.

The Tribunal allowed both appeals by way of remand, ensuring that the Adjudicating Authority would re-examine the case after considering the appellant's submissions and providing a fair hearing. The judgment highlighted the importance of upholding natural justice principles and giving due consideration to the appellant's circumstances under BIFR during the adjudication process.