2017 (10) TMI 128 - AT - Central Excise

Clandestine manufacture and removal - MS Ingots - the second show cause notice is pending adjudication - multiplicity of proceedings - Held that - The appeal is of the year 2010 and it has been pending before the Tribunal. Ahead of the transition of Indirect Tax to GST, this Tribunal has been given a mandate to dispose of all old cases. Viewed in this light, we are of the considered opinion that it would be appropriate and prudent to close the file for the purpose of statistics - the appeal is disposed as file closed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Alleged unaccounted manufacture and clearance of MS ingots
2. Reduction of duty demand by Commissioner (Appeals)
3. Subsequent show cause notice negating clandestine removal
4. Settlement Commission admission and Final Order
5. Challenge of orders through Writ Petitions
6. Pending Writ Appeal and its impact on the present case
7. Closure of the appeal for statistical purposes

Analysis:
1. The appellant was involved in the manufacture and clearance of MS Ingots, leading to a show cause notice for alleged unaccounted production. The Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence demanded Central Excise Duty, which was reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals) to a lower amount with penalties and interest.

2. Subsequently, a show cause notice from the same authority negated the earlier allegation by pointing out the non-receipt of imported scrap necessary for manufacturing the alleged quantity of ingots. This raised doubts on the unaccounted production and clearance mentioned in the previous order.

3. The appellant admitted to a portion of the demand before the Settlement Commission due to the lack of end-use certificate, leading to the matter being sent for adjudication. The subsequent challenge through Writ Petitions resulted in varied outcomes, with one petition dismissed and another remanded to the original authority.

4. A pending Writ Appeal further complicated the situation, prompting the Tribunal to consider closing the file for statistical purposes while allowing the appeal and any interim orders to continue. Both parties were granted the liberty to reopen the matter based on the High Court's decision or any change in circumstances.