2019 (5) TMI 1867 - AT - Central Excise

Clandestine removal - prefabricated cabinets shelters and phase channel material - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT - After issuance of show cause notice, the appellant has asked to supply of relied upon documents i.e. production slip on the basis of which it is alleged by the Revenue that the appellant has cleared the goods clandestinely. The said production slip was not supplied to the appellant till date, despite their request. Moreover, in the adjudication order, it has been recorded that the appellant has asked for supply of documents after 5 years of their resumption, the said request cannot be acceded. Non supply of the relied upon documents shows the conduct of the adjudicating authority, therefore, it concluded that the adjudicating authority is not having the said production slip in their record to allege clandestine removal of the goods. If the matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority for re-adjudication, the same will not serve any purpose as the production slip was resumed in 2009 and we are running in 2019 in terms of the decision of the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/S. MANISH VINYLS, SHRI O.P. KHETAN, DIRECTOR VERSUS CCE, FARIDABAD 2019 (4) TMI 434 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH , wherein this Tribunal has held that the gap of almost 19 years will not serve the purpose to remand back the matter to the adjudicating authority - in the present case, as the relied upon document has not been provided to the appellant, therefore, there is gross violation of principles of natural justice and remanding the matter will not serve the purpose. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against confirmed duty demand, interest, and penalty due to clandestine removal of goods.

Analysis:
The appellant, a manufacturer of prefabricated cabinets shelters, faced a demand of duty amounting to ?63,38,455 along with interest and penalty for allegedly clandestinely removing goods not accounted for in their stock register. The case originated from a production slip recovered during an audit, indicating the production of goods not recorded by the appellant. A show cause notice was issued, and upon adjudication, duty demand, interest, and penalty were confirmed. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the decision, leading to the appellant's appeal.

The appellant argued that the production slip, crucial for the allegation of clandestine removal, was not provided to them despite requests, rendering the order unsustainable. Citing a precedent, the appellant highlighted the importance of providing relied-upon documents for a fair adjudication process. Additionally, the appellant contended that no investigation or statements were conducted to support the claim of clandestine removal, further challenging the validity of the demand.

In response, the Revenue supported the impugned order, setting the stage for a detailed examination of the submissions. Upon review, the Tribunal noted the absence of the production slip supplied to the appellant, even after repeated requests. The Tribunal found the failure to provide relied-upon documents as a violation of natural justice principles, indicating a lack of evidence to support the allegation of clandestine removal. Considering the substantial time gap since the production slip's recovery and the present date, the Tribunal deemed remanding the matter for re-adjudication futile.

Consequently, the Tribunal held that the absence of crucial documents constituted a gross violation of natural justice, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order. The appeal was allowed with any consequential relief deemed necessary, emphasizing the importance of upholding fair procedures and providing essential documents for a just adjudication process.