2016 (3) TMI 707 - AT - Central Excise

Central Excise registration revoked - non follow of appropriate procedure - Held that - As find that on the application filed by the applicant for common registration, the registration was granted on 6.9.2013. The same was revoked without following the principles of natural justice without giving an opportunity of being heard to the respondents or to bring even the effective reasons for revoking the registration in the knowledge of the respondents. Further, the same was revoked without following the due procedure for revocation and these things have been examined by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against revocation of Central Excise registration.
2. Principles of natural justice not followed.
3. Validity of common registration granted.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of the Deputy Commissioner revoking the Central Excise registration of the respondents. The respondent, a manufacturer of clinker and cement, had applied for common registration of two units, which was initially granted and later revoked. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the revocation order citing non-compliance with principles of natural justice and procedural irregularities. The Revenue contended that the principles of natural justice were not followed by the Commissioner (Appeals).

2. The Revenue argued that the common registration granted to the respondents was not permissible, and they were not given an opportunity to be heard by the Commissioner (Appeals). However, the Counsel for the respondent highlighted that the Commissioner (Appeals) had considered the matter thoroughly and set aside the revocation order based on the lack of natural justice and procedural deficiencies. The respondent had already been granted common registration by the Commissioner.

3. The Member (Judicial) analyzed the case and found that the registration was revoked without following principles of natural justice or due procedure. The Commissioner (Appeals) had correctly observed the lack of proper grounds for revocation and the absence of a fair hearing for the respondents. The Member (Judicial) upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and dismissed the Revenue's appeal, noting that the common registration had already been granted to the appellant. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to natural justice principles and procedural fairness in such matters.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues raised in the appeal against the revocation of Central Excise registration, the arguments presented by both parties regarding natural justice, and the final decision based on the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Member (Judicial) of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI.