2006 (6) TMI 33 - AT - Central Excise

Central Excise Natural justice Adjudication authority relied upon documents were supplied on 12.11.2005 and order passed on 30.11.2005 without giving opportunity to defend the charge Impugned order passed in violation to the principles of natural justice Matter remanded back to adjudicating authority to take fresh decision

Summary

Issues:
- Application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty
- Violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned order
- Adequacy of opportunities for personal hearing

Analysis:
The Appellant filed an application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty amounting to Rs. 4,27,82,983, alleging that the impugned order was issued in violation of natural justice principles. The timeline of events revealed that a show-cause notice was sent on 5.10.05, documents relied upon were received on 12.11.05, and subsequent hearing dates were fixed on 28.11.05 and 29/30.11.05. Despite requests for more time to prepare a defense, the adjudicating authority passed the order on 30.11.05, which was deemed unjust as the Appellant did not receive a fair opportunity to defend the charges. The Tribunal found that the impugned order indeed violated the principles of natural justice by not granting an effective opportunity for defense. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order, waived the pre-deposit of duty and penalties, and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision after affording a proper opportunity for a personal hearing. The appeal was disposed of through remand, emphasizing the importance of upholding natural justice principles.

The Revenue contended that they had a strong case on merit and that the Appellant had failed to avail themselves of three opportunities for personal hearing, justifying the order passed. However, the Tribunal focused on the procedural aspects and the timeline of events leading to the impugned order. It noted that despite the Appellant's requests for additional time to prepare a defense, the adjudicating authority proceeded with an ex parte order. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of providing a fair and adequate opportunity for the Appellant to present their case, especially considering the timing of document receipt and hearing dates. By setting aside the order and remanding the matter for a fresh decision with proper procedural adherence, the Tribunal underscored the significance of upholding natural justice principles in such proceedings. The decision to waive the pre-deposit of duty and penalties further emphasized the need for a fair and just process in adjudicating such matters.