9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (3) TMI 432X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay Wagons for and on behalf of the Indian Railways out of the raw materials and components provided by the Indian Railway; that an agreement was executed between Indian Railways and the Appellants on 25-3-1992 according to which Excise duty shall be reimbursed by the Railways; that a show cause notice dated 1-10-93 was issued to them for demanding duty amounting to Rs. 55.20 lakhs in respect of base floor, body ends etc. which came into existence as a part of the wagon; that the Appellants had sent detailed information/particulars with regard to the goods in question under their letter dated 30-6-1996; that on the basis of the said data, the Assistant Commissioner by a Corrigendum dated 24-1-97 rectified the error in demanding duty which wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be treated as legal infirmity. Exceeding these powers will at best be administrative irregularity. Reliance has also been placed on the decision in the case of CCE, Jaipur v. Jay Pee Agro Chemical Ltd., 1999 (104) E.L.T. 819 (T). He thus contended that the Memorandum dated 16-2-2001 does not come under the purview of the Central Excise Act and if any corrigendum is valid, it is the one issued on 25-1-97 which was issued after considering the data placed on record. Alternatively the learned Advocate mentioned that the Memorandum dated 16-2-2000 is bad as the same had been issued after taking up the hearing of the original show cause notice and it is hit by time limit and the demand is time-barred. 4. The learned Advocate, further, con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for de novo adjudication after going into the question of marketability of the goods. The learned Advocate mentioned that the products like the floor, body ends, under frames are neither sold in the market nor capable of being sold and as such are not goods liable to Central Excise duty. 5. Countering the arguments, Shri Jagdish Singh, learned Departmental Representative, submitted that the corrigendum is not an Adjudication Order and the re-correction has been made by the Department by issuing of Memorandum dated 16-2-2001; that such a Memorandum is not a Review Order and as such question of any time-limit does not arise; that the Corrigendum initially issued on 24-1-97 was without any jurisdiction having no Authority in law. The learne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner of Central Excise, it was not open to the Assistant Commissioner to issue the Corrigendum dated 24-1-97. He had no locus standi in the matter to issue the corrigendum. It is not the case of the Appellant nor any material has been brought on record to show that the Corrigendum was issued on the direction of the Commissioner. Corrigendum cannot be considered to be an adjudication Order and secondly the Assistant Commissioner was not empowered to adjudicate the matter as the case was before the Commissioner for the purpose of adjudication. The Assistant Collector is not empowered under the Act to adjudicate a matter which is before the Commissioner for the purpose of adjudication unless and until the Commissioner sends it to the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th specifically in the impugned Order. A clear and specific finding has to be recorded by the Adjudicating Authority on these aspects. We, therefore, remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for de novo adjudication after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the Appellants. Both the Appellants and Revenue are at liberty to adduce evidence in support of their submissions. 8. The Appeal is disposed of in the above terms. Sd/- (V.K. Agrawal) Member (T) 9. [Order per : Krishna Kumar, Member (J)]. - While concurring with the learned Member (Technical), I make following observations:- Para 7 of the written submission at page 78 is reproduced as under :- The Department has also clarified by Circular M.F. (DR) Cir. No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
