1989 (9) TMI 256 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Modification of earlier stay order due to show cause notice validity.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an application seeking modification of a previous stay order issued by the Bench. The primary issue revolves around the validity of a show cause notice signed by the Deputy Collector instead of the Collector, as mandated by Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act. The appellant's argument, supported by a judgment of the Gujarat High Court and Tribunal orders, asserts that the notice is void under the amended Section 11A. The respondent, however, contends that even if the notice is void, subsequent proceedings may not be affected, citing a Supreme Court judgment. The Tribunal acknowledges the concerns raised by both parties regarding the potential burden of repeated applications but emphasizes the need for exceptional consideration in certain cases for the sake of justice.

The Tribunal, after careful consideration of the arguments presented, acknowledges the undisputed facts surrounding the show cause notice and the legal requirements under Section 11A of the Act. In light of previous judgments and the specific circumstances of the case, the Tribunal finds that the show cause notice issued by the Deputy Collector is prima facie not maintainable. Consequently, the Tribunal modifies all earlier orders and waives the pre-deposit of the adjudged amount, granting a stay on the proceedings during the ongoing case. The decision is based on the precedents set by the Gujarat High Court judgment and the series of judgments cited by the appellant, emphasizing the importance of adhering to legal provisions in such matters.

Furthermore, the Tribunal addresses the appellant's request for an early hearing, advising them to submit a separate application for the same. The miscellaneous application seeking modification of the stay order is disposed of with the directive that the validity of the proceedings can be argued when the appeal is formally taken up. The judgment highlights the significance of following legal procedures and the need for exceptional consideration in certain cases, balancing the interests of justice with the practical concerns of the legal process.