2010 (3) TMI 394 - AT - Central Excise

Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986- Tribunal passed order as Commissioner has also not considered the contemporary records about the manufacture, raw materials used and technology and machinery available with the appellant. As also the commercial identity (salt glazed or slip glazed) of the pipes cleared to various parties. In these circumstances, this issue is required to go back to the Commissioner for a detailed re-consideration. Held that- inspection of documents not deniable merely because assessee filed his reply to SCN. No case that documents were of some secret nature or that inspection thereof would prejudice public interest. Principle of natural justice violated. Matter remanded to Commissioner for reconsideration

Summary

Issues:
Dispute over stoneware product glazing method; Failure to comply with Tribunal's directions; Denial of natural justice.

Analysis:
The appellants, manufacturers of stoneware, availed certain notifications during the relevant period. A dispute arose regarding whether the stoneware products were salt glazed or slip glazed. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the Commissioner for detailed reconsideration. The Commissioner, in the impugned order, favored the Department, leading to the present appeal.

The primary contention against the impugned order was the failure to comply with the Tribunal's specific directions and the denial of natural justice. The Tribunal had directed the Commissioner to consider all contemporary records, raw materials, technology, and machinery used by the appellants. The appellants' request to inspect seized documents was unjustifiably rejected by the Commissioner, indicating a lack of application of mind.

The Commissioner's observations highlighted the appellants' alleged failure to produce certain evidence and the denial of their defense based on a previous Tribunal order. However, the Commissioner's refusal to allow inspection of seized documents contradicted the principles of natural justice. The impugned order did not reflect a comprehensive consideration of all records, necessitating a remand for proper review.

Given the denial of opportunities to present relevant documents and the lack of thorough consideration of records, the appeals were allowed with directions for reconsideration by the Commissioner. The Commissioner was instructed to expedite the hearing process and ensure cooperation for timely resolution, with a compliance report due by a specified date.

In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the importance of following Tribunal directions, ensuring natural justice, and conducting a thorough review of all relevant records in adjudicating disputes. The decision emphasized the need for procedural fairness and compliance with legal principles in administrative proceedings.