2017 (2) TMI 242 - AT - Central Excise

Confiscation - Penalty - Held that - The copy of the returns submitted before this Tribunal today indicates that duty demanded in the show cause notice was paid. However, the Original Authority did not have benefited of such evidences before him. I, therefore, remand the matter back to the Original Authority who shall consider the evidence and re-adjudicate the case after giving opportunity to the appellants. Both the appellants are directed to submit their defence reply alongwith evidence before the Original Authority within sixty days from the date of receipt of this order - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against Order-in-Appeal confirming Order-in-Original regarding confiscation of seized goods, short paid Central Excise duty, and penalty imposition.

Analysis:
The case involved two appellants challenging Order-in-Appeal Nos. 158-162/CE/APPL/ALLD/2011 confirming the Order-in-Original related to confiscation of seized goods, short paid Central Excise duty, and penalty imposition. M/s. Mirzapur Electrical Industries Ltd. (MEIL) was accused of excise duty discrepancies, leading to a show cause notice in 2010. The Original Authority, noting the absence of a response from MEIL, confirmed the demands and imposed penalties. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this decision, prompting the present appeals before the Tribunal.

The appellants argued that the seized goods were within the factory premises and had not been removed, challenging the confiscation. They presented ER-I Returns to show payment of short paid Central Excise duty, disputing the basis of the show cause notice. The learned counsel highlighted discrepancies in the notice and the actual payment status reflected in the returns for different months.

Upon reviewing the contentions, the Tribunal noted that the Original Authority lacked the evidence submitted before them. Acknowledging the duty payment evidence presented during the appeal, the Tribunal remanded the case back to the Original Authority for re-adjudication. The appellants were directed to submit their defense and evidence within sixty days, with the Original Authority instructed to offer a hearing within thirty days of submission and adjudicate the matter within another month. The Tribunal allowed the appeals by remanding the case for further consideration and decision by the Original Authority.