2018 (6) TMI 182 - AT - Central Excise

Issuance of necessary clarification - principles of natural justice - remand order to reconsider the issue - Held that - The adjudicating authority has more or less followed the directions given by Tribunal in denovo adjudication - We do not find any reason to pass any clarification let alone a necessity to offer any clarification in the denovo adjudication undertaken by adjudicating authority - appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Absence of representation by the respondent despite notice.
2. Consideration of remand directions by the adjudicating authority.
3. Confirmation of demands against the respondent.
4. Lack of clarification on duties confirmed against the respondent.
5. Production of a chart indicating demands raised and confirmed in the show cause notice and the impugned order.
6. Compliance with directions given by the Tribunal in denovo adjudication.
7. Disposal of the appeal.

Analysis:
1. The judgment dealt with the absence of representation by the respondent despite notice. The Tribunal decided to proceed with the appeal for disposal due to the matter dating back to 2009 and no appearance from the respondent.

2. The adjudicating authority's consideration of remand directions was a crucial issue. The Tribunal noted that the authority had confirmed various demands against the respondent based on the remand directions given by the Tribunal in a previous order. The Bench had directed the authority to reconsider the issue after hearing the respondent and recording the reply.

3. The confirmation of demands against the respondent was a key aspect of the judgment. The adjudicating authority had confirmed duties against the respondent in the Orders-in-Original dated 08.01.2007 and 09.01.2007. The Tribunal reviewed the records to ensure compliance with the directions given.

4. A significant concern raised was the lack of clarity on the duties confirmed against the respondent in the impugned order. The Tribunal acknowledged the submission made by the Learned DR regarding this issue and considered issuing necessary clarification.

5. The production of a chart indicating demands raised and confirmed was crucial for the case. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner(A.R.) to produce a chart showing the demands raised in the show cause notice and confirmed in the impugned order. The compliance with this direction was essential for the Tribunal's assessment.

6. The compliance with the directions given by the Tribunal in denovo adjudication was a pivotal part of the judgment. The Tribunal reviewed the chart produced by the Commissioner(A.R.) and concluded that the adjudicating authority had largely followed the directions provided. Therefore, no further clarification was deemed necessary.

7. Finally, the appeal was disposed of by the Tribunal based on the analysis and considerations outlined above. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in the open court, marking the conclusion of the legal proceedings in this matter.