1991 (9) TMI 196 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against Order-in-Original No. 23/89 for clandestine removal of TV sets, denial of principles of natural justice, charges of non-accountal of picture tubes, clearances on forged invoices, gate passes, duplicate sales invoices, repairs exceeding production, under-valuation, service charges, confiscation of TV sets, and imposition of personal penalty.

Analysis:

The case involved an appeal against an Order-in-Original for alleged clandestine removal of TV sets. Central Excise Officers conducted visits and seized records related to production, clearance, and sales. Charges included non-accountal of picture tubes, clearances on forged documents, under-valuation, and improper accountal of service charges. The Principal Collector confirmed charges, imposed excise duty, ordered confiscation of seized TV sets, and imposed a hefty personal penalty. The appellants challenged the order citing denial of principles of natural justice, specifically lack of cross-examination of witnesses and non-supply of relevant documents for rebuttal.

The appellants argued that denial of cross-examination and non-supply of crucial documents violated natural justice principles. The Collector's reliance on seized documents and statements without allowing cross-examination was deemed unjust. The defense claimed a conspiracy by competitors and disgruntled staff, emphasizing the need for fair procedure. The Tribunal found merit in the appellants' argument and remanded the case for de novo adjudication, directing the Collector to allow cross-examination and provide necessary documents for a fair hearing.

In a separate assent, another Member highlighted the importance of observing natural justice principles in quasi-judicial proceedings. Emphasizing the seriousness of forgery charges, the need for supplying alleged forged documents for inspection was underscored. The Member called for a re-examination of defective tubes and undervaluation charges, stressing the necessity of detailed findings and clear orders on reassessment. The Collector was advised to consider these observations during the re-adjudication process and ensure a fair opportunity for the appellants to present their case.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed, and the case was remanded for a fresh adjudication, emphasizing the importance of upholding natural justice principles, providing relevant documents, and ensuring a fair hearing for all parties involved.