2012 (11) TMI 442 - AT - Central Excise

Principle of natural justice - non-granting of relied upon documents to the main appellant - documents recovered during the raid in the premises of main appellant - Held that - It is seen that the entire set of relied upon documents was given to the appellant recently i.e. after the matter has been adjudicated and the matter came up for final disposal before Tribunal. Suffice to say that non-granting of relied upon documents to the main appellant and other appellants would have made their plea and the defence before the adjudicating authority as a weak submission. We also find that the Bench cannot overlook the fact that the defences that can be raised by the appellant based upon the relied upon documents even if the same is not taken up as a ground of appeal. Therefore, matter needs to be remanded back to adjudicating authority.

Summary

Issues Involved: Remand of the matter to the adjudicating authority based on non-receipt of relied upon documents after the adjudication order.

Analysis:
The main issue in this case revolves around the non-receipt of relied upon documents by the appellant before the adjudication stage. The appellant argued that they were not provided with these crucial documents until after the adjudication order was passed, which affected their defense before the Tribunal. The appellant's counsel requested a remand of the matter back to the adjudicating authority in the interest of justice.

The Tribunal considered the submissions from both sides and reviewed the records. It was noted that the appellant had raised the issue of non-receipt of relied upon documents during the Show Cause Notice stage with the lower authorities. The Tribunal acknowledged that the non-granting of these documents could weaken the appellant's plea and defense. Therefore, the Tribunal decided that the entire issue needed to be reconsidered by the adjudicating authority, taking into account the appellant's defense based on the recently received relied upon documents.

The Tribunal expressed displeasure at the appellant's delay in raising this issue during the Stay Petition stage but ultimately decided to remand the matter back to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision. The Tribunal emphasized that justice should be served promptly, directing the adjudicating authority to hear and dispose of the matter within six months from the date of the order or on production of a copy of the order by either party.

Additionally, the Tribunal ordered the appellant to deposit a specified amount for the hearing and disposal of the appeals, with a condition that the appellant should not seek a refund until the matter is resolved by the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back for re-decision, emphasizing the importance of following the principles of natural justice in the de-novo proceedings. The cross objection filed by the Department was also disposed of in the judgment.