2008 (2) TMI 224 - AT - Central Excise

Documents relied upon by revenue were not supplied to appellant so they could present their defence plea- When certain documents are relevant and may be beneficial for raising a defence plea, the aggrieved should not be deprived of copies of those documents - demand is huge, so there is violation of principle of natural justice in not supplying relied upon documents to appellants

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in filing appeal against the order of adjudication
2. Condonation of delay and admission of appeal
3. Denial of natural justice and violation of principles of natural justice
4. Request for copies of documents for defense and remand of the matter for readjudication

Analysis:

1. The appellant filed an appeal with a delay of 14 days against the order of adjudication levying Central Excise duty on various counts. The charges included clandestine manufacturing and clearance of finished goods without following legal procedures or payment of duty, as well as irregular availing of concessional rates leading to duty evasion.

2. The appellant sought condonation of the filing delay, explaining that their factory was closed, and steps were consciously taken to file the appeal without any malicious intent. The Tribunal, after hearing both parties, condoned the delay, considering the prejudice the appellant would face due to the substantial demand and penal consequences.

3. The appellant raised concerns about denial of natural justice, stating that they were deprived of proper opportunities for defense due to the closure of their factory and unavailability of essential documents. The Tribunal acknowledged the importance of natural justice, emphasizing the necessity of providing copies of relevant documents to enable the appellant to present a robust defense. The matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for a fair adjudication process.

4. The appellant requested copies of documents crucial for their defense, highlighting the need for a fair opportunity to represent their case. The Revenue argued that sufficient opportunities were provided for defense, but the Tribunal found merit in the appellant's contention regarding the unavailability of essential documents. Citing various legal precedents emphasizing natural justice, the Tribunal remanded the matter for readjudication, ensuring the appellant's right to a proper defense.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeals by remanding the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for a just resolution, emphasizing the importance of natural justice and fair opportunities for defense in legal proceedings.