Mohan Aluminium Pvt. Ltd vs Commr. Of Customs- Silliguri
- CitationCustoms Appeal No. 71209/2013
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed an appeal for non-compliance with a pre-deposit direction without deciding the matter on merits, and the same issue has already been remitted by the Tribunal in an earlier decision, the Tribunal may set aside the impugned order and remit the matter for fresh decision on merits without insisting on any pre-deposit, with a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant and all issues kept open.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
(Arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No. 48/SLG/2013 dated-14/03/2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-III), Kolkata)
For approval and signature of:
DR. D.M. MISRA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER DR. I.P. LAL, HONBLE TECHNICAL MEMBER
======================================================
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 ?
Mohan Aluminium Pvt. Ltd.
APPELLANT(S) VERSUS Commr. of Customs- Silliguri RESPONDENT(S)
APPEARANCE
NONE FOR APPELLANTS Sri S.P. Pal, Appraiser (A.R.) FOR THE RESPONDENTS
CORAM: DR. D.M. MISRA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER DR. I.P. LAL, HONBLE TECHNICAL MEMBER
DATE OF HEARING & DECISION : 05.01.2015
ORDER NO.FO/A/75011/2015
Per DR. D.M. MISRA
This is an application filed by the applicant seeking waiver of pre-deposit of Cess of Rs.21,973/- and penalty of equal amount.
2. None present for the applicant despite notice.
3. Ld. A.R. for the Revenue submits that the Ld. Commissioner has not decided the issue on merit but dismissed their appeal on the ground for non-compliance with the direction of pre-deposit order dated-21/01/2013. The Ld. A.R. for the Revenue fairly submitted that on similar issue, this Tribunal has remanded the matter to the Ld. Commr. (Appeal) vide order No. FO/A/75168-75172/2014 dated 28.04.2014. He has no objection in remanding the case.
4. After considering the submissions of both sides, We are of the view that the Appeal itself could be disposed of at this stage. Accordingly, after waiving the requirement of pre-deposit, the Appeal itself is taken up for disposal.
5. We find force in the submission of the Ld. A.R. for the Revenue. On similar issue, this Tribunal has earlier remanded the case to the Ld. Commr. (Appeal) for deciding the issue afresh on merit without insisting any pre-deposit vide order dated 28/04/2014 in the case of M/s. Indica Pipes Vs. Commr. of C.Ex., Customs & Service Tax-Silliguri. Following the said order, we set aside the impugned Order-in-Appeal and remit the matter to the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the issue afresh, without insisting any pre-deposit from the Appellants. Needless to mention, a reasonable opportunity of hearing be given to the Appellants. All issues are kept open. Appeal is allowed by way of remand. Stay petition disposed off.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court) Sd/- 09/01/2015 Sd/- 09/01/2015 (DR.I.P.LAL) (DR. D.M. MISRA) TECHNICAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER k.b/-
Customs Appeal No. 71209/2013
3
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free