Cce, Chandigarh vs C/O Shri Bhupindra Steels (P) Ltd

IN THE CUSPTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI, PRINCIPAL BENCH NEW DELHI

Date of Hearing/ Decision:30.01.2015

Excise Appeal No.E/3085 of 2005-EX(DB)

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.222/CE/CHD/02005 dated 22.06.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh]

CCE, Chandigarh Appellants Vs.

Shri Rajan Kumar

C/o Shri Bhupindra Steels (P) Ltd. Respondent

For approval and signature:

Honble Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical)

Honble Shri S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial)

1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

Appearance: Rep. by Shri M.S. Negi, DR for the appellant.

Rep. by Shri Abhishekh Pareek, Advocate for the respondent.

CORAM: Honble Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)

Honble Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical)

Final Order No. 50774/2015 /Dated:30.01.2015

Per Rakesh Kumar:

The facts leading to filing of this appeal, in brief, are as under:-

1.1 On 11.5.2005, the Asstt. Commissioner, Central Excise Division IV, Faridabad, functioning under Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-IV, served a notice on Shri Rajan Kumar C/o M/s.Bhupendra Steels Ltd., Plot No.25, Sector-6, Faridabad directing him to pay duty of Rs.15,36,677/- alongwith interest thereon of Rs.17,99,050/- in terms of a recovery certificate no.V(30)RCC MS/26/MSS/2004/2014 dated 23.03.2005 issued by the Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mandi Gobindgarh Division, under Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 to the Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-IV, Faridabad. Against this letter dated 11.05.2005 of the Asstt. Commissioner of the Division-IV, Faridabad, Shri Rajan Kumar filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals),Chandigarh. The Commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh vide order-in-appeal dated 22.06.2005 held that the recovery action initiated against Shri Rajan Kumar is illegal and set aside the same.

1.2 Against this order dated 22.06.2005 of the Commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh,this appeal has been filed by the Revenue on the ground that since the recovery notice had been issued by the Asstt. Commissinoer, Division-IV, Faridabad, which comes under the Central Excise Commissionerate, Delhi-IV, the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh had no jurisdiction to decide the appeal against this notice.

2. Heard both the sides.

3. After considering the arguments from both the sides, we are of the view that the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh has absolutely no jurisdiction to decide the appeal filed against the recovery notice issued to the respondent by the Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise, Division-IV which is under Central Excise Commissionerate, Delhi-IV. A Commissioner (Appeals) appointed under Central Excise Rules for a particular jurisdiction can decide the appeals filed by only those assessees, who fall within that jurisdiction. In view of this, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is, however, remanded to the jurisdictional Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) to decide the same after hearing both the sides.

(Rakesh Kumar)

Member (Technical)

( S.K. Mohanty)

Member (Judicial)

Ckp

1