9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenge to order dated 7-9-2002 passed by CEGAT dismissing second appeal on Modvat credit claim. Petitioner's contention on Modvat credit claim. Penalty imposed by Adjudicating Authority. Tribunal's decision without affording opportunity to address on merits. Petitioner's submission on lack of opportunity before Tribunal. Respondent's defense of impugned orders. Examination of main submission by petitioner. Tribunal's authority to recall order. Decline to examine petitioner's grievance. Granting liberty to approach Tribunal for recalling order. Modvat Credit Claim Issue: The dispute centered around the petitioner's claim for Modvat credit on certain items totaling Rs. 12,64,912/- and Rs. 4,88,636/-. The Departmental Authorities contended that the petitioner was not entitled to the Modvat credit, leading to penalties imposed by the Adjudicating Authority. The Commissioner of Appeals and the Tribunal upheld the decision against the petitioner, resulting in the writ challenging the order dated 7-9-2002 passed by CEGAT. The petitioner argued for the rightful claim of Modvat credit, while the Respondent defended the impugned orders. Opportunity to Address Tribunal Issue: The petitioner raised a significant issue regarding the Tribunal's decision without affording an opportunity to address on merits. The petitioner's lawyer argued that the Tribunal proceeded to decide the appeal on merits without addressing the stay application, which was listed for hearing. The petitioner contended that the appeal should be remanded for a proper hearing on merits, emphasizing the lack of opportunity provided by the Tribunal. However, the Respondent opposed this submission, asserting that the impugned order was passed on merits and should not be set aside solely on the ground of lack of opportunity. Tribunal's Authority to Recall Order Issue: The Court deliberated on the Tribunal's authority to recall the order based on the petitioner's grievance. The Court emphasized that the petitioner's complaint should have been raised before the Tribunal itself rather than through the writ. It was highlighted that the Tribunal is best positioned to examine the facts and determine if the petitioner's grievance warrants a recall of the order. The Court declined to examine the petitioner's grievance and granted liberty to approach the Tribunal for recalling the impugned order. The Court reserved the petitioner's right to challenge the order on merits at a later stage if the grievance fails before the Tribunal. In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issues related to the Modvat credit claim, lack of opportunity to address the Tribunal, and the Tribunal's authority to recall the order. The Court emphasized the importance of raising grievances before the appropriate forum and granted the petitioner the opportunity to approach the Tribunal for reconsideration. The judgment highlighted the procedural aspects and the significance of addressing grievances through the proper legal channels.
|
