2023 (6) TMI 782 - AT - Central Excise

Alleged clandestine removal of MS Items - shortage of stock - order passed ex-parte - all the documents were not examined - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - Admittedly, the Appellant s factory was undergoing labour unrest and because of closures of the unit they could not have received the PH Communications. It is on record that both the Lower Authorities have passed the Orders ex-parte. As submitted by the Ld. Advocate, they have many documents in their defence which they have annexed to the present Appeal. As these documents are required to be verified, the matter is required to be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority. Both the appellant as well as the Authorized Representative of the Revenue also agree that the matter has to be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for this purpose. The Appeals are remanded to the Adjudicating Authority who will follow the Principles of natural justice and give the opportunity to the Appellant to make all their oral and written submissions - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Alleged clandestine removal of MS items, denial of opportunity of Personal Hearing, verification of earlier proceedings regarding shortage of goods.

In the present case, the issue revolved around the alleged clandestine removal of MS items from the Appellant's factory during a period of labour unrest, leading to discrepancies in stock quantities. The Appellant's advocate argued that despite the closure of the factory due to labour issues, they had evidence of payment of Excise Duty for certain clearances, disputing the alleged shortages. The advocate also highlighted that the Appellant had previously admitted liability for a similar shortage in 2008 under the SVLDR Scheme. The Appellant contended that they were not given the opportunity of a Personal Hearing by the Adjudicating or Lower Appellate Authority to present their documentary evidence.

Upon hearing both sides, the Tribunal noted that the Appellant's factory had indeed faced labour unrest, affecting their ability to receive communications for Personal Hearings, leading to ex-parte orders by the Lower Authorities. Recognizing the need for verification of the documentary evidence provided by the Appellant, the Tribunal decided to remand the case to the Adjudicating Authority. The remand was deemed necessary to ensure the principles of natural justice were followed, allowing the Appellant to present their oral and written submissions, along with documentary evidence, including the SVLDRS Discharge granted in the earlier case. The Adjudicating Authority was instructed to pass a considered order within 4 months from the date of communication of the Tribunal's decision.