M/S Jai Ambica Ssk Ltd vs Cce, Aurangabad

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. AGS(222)70/09 dated 21.10.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Aurangabad].

For approval and signature:

Honble Shri M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial)

======================================================

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No 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 : No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Seen of the order?

4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?

======================================================

M/s Jai Ambica SSK Ltd.

Appellant

Vs.

CCE, Aurangabad Respondent

Appearance:

Shri Prashant Patankar, Consultant for Appellants

Shri Ashutosh Nath, A.C. (AR) for Respondents

CORAM:

HONBLE SHRI M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Date of Hearing: 16.06.2015

Date of Decision: 16.06.2015

ORDER NO.

Per: Shri M. V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial)

1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. AGS(222)70/09 dated 21.10.2009.

2. Heard both sides and perused the records.

3. On perusal of records, it transpires that the issue involved in this case is regarding refund of an amount Rs.27,82,900/- on 34,499 quintals of sugar said to have not been cleared by the appellant. It is the case of the Ld. Counsel that though they have discharged duty on 66,689 quintals of sugar, appellant have actually not cleared 34,499 quintals of sugar; it is the submission that they can reconcile the clearance with invoices and demonstrate the facts, and fairly submits that they had not produced the reconciliation before the lower authorities. In my considered view, the issue needs reconsideration on the factual matrix as to whether, appellant had cleared the 34,499 quintals of sugar or not, on scrutiny of records, which can be done so by the adjudicating authority only.

4. Keeping all the issues open and without recording any opinion on the merits of the case, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed by way of remand to the adjudicating authority, who shall reconsider issue afresh and pass an order after following the principles of natural justice.

5. The appeal is allowed by the way of remand.

(Dictated in Court)

(M.V. Ravindran) Saifi Member (Judicial)

1