2004 (2) TMI 177 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Locus standi of the appellant to challenge the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Locus standi of the appellant
The appellant, a trading entity, challenged the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the payment of excise duty on waste and scrap purchased from ONGC. The appellant contended that they were 'persons aggrieved' under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, citing relevant case laws. The Department argued that no show cause notice was issued to the appellant, and the order did not burden them with any duty or penalty. The Tribunal analyzed previous judgments and held that the appellant, being a third party to the adjudication proceedings, did not have locus standi to file the appeal. Reference was made to the Supreme Court's ruling in Northern Plastics, emphasizing the requirement of a direct legal interest in the goods under adjudication. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant lacked the necessary legal interest and dismissed the appeal, following precedents like Hindustan Photo Films and Jaiswal Engg. Works.

The Tribunal further discussed cases like Rohit Pulp & Paper Mills and Jaiswal Engg. Works, where appeals by third parties were rejected due to lack of locus standi. The Counsel relied on a Supreme Court judgment regarding property tax assessment, but the Tribunal differentiated the case, highlighting the limited scope of appellate remedies under the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal also distinguished the wider concept of locus standi in public interest litigations from statutory provisions, as clarified in Northern Plastics. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant's appeal did not meet the criteria set by the Supreme Court and dismissed the appeal based on the lack of locus standi under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act.

In conclusion, the Tribunal held that the appellant did not have the necessary locus standi to challenge the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act. The appeal was dismissed based on the lack of a direct legal interest in the goods under adjudication, in line with the principles established in relevant case laws and the statutory provisions governing appellate remedies in excise matters.