Madhuri Steels vs CESTAT, Chennai

A. Selvam, J.—These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals have bean directed, against the Final Order Nos. 1130 to 1132 of 2008 passed by the CESTAT, South Zonal Bench, Chennai. The appellant has been doing the business of steels and bound to pay central excise duty and proper duty has been paid belatedly. Under the said circumstances, with regard to demand of interest, the show cause notices in question have been issued and the demands made therein have been confirmed by way of passing Orders-in-Original and the same have been confirmed by the Commissioner of Appeals. Against the orders passed by the Commissioner of Appeals, the appellant has filed relevant appeals before the CESTAT. The CESTAT has dismissed all the appeals by way of passing final orders and against the final orders passed by the CESTAT, these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals have been preferred.

At the time of admitting the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeals, the following common substantial questions of law have been settled for consideration:

(a) Whether the first respondent correctly applied the law of levy of interest and recovery of interest in respect of central excise duty determined prior to 11-5-2001 in terms of explanation to Section 132 of Finance Act, 2001 read with Section 11AA and Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944?

(b) Whether the first respondent applied principles of natural justice before passing orders by affording three mandatory opportunities as per Section 35B of Central Excise Act?

(c) Whether the first respondent correctly applied the law of limitation of one year prescribed under Section 11A of the Act in respect of collection of interest and whether the recovery of interest is barred by general law of limitation?

The learned counsel, appearing for the appellant has contended that in fact, the appellant has paid duty belatedly. Under the said circumstances, the interest in question has been demanded. But the CESTAT without considering the grounds raised in the appeals and also without giving sufficient opportunity to the appellant has simply confirmed the orders passed in original as well as the orders passed by the Commissioner of Appeals and therefore, for giving opportunity to the appellant, the final orders in question are liable to be set aside and the matters are liable to be remitted to the file of the CESTAT.

On the basis of the representation made on the side of the appellant, this Court has perused all the final orders and ultimately found that even without hearing the contention put forth on the side of the appellant, the CESTAT has simply upheld the orders passed by the Commissioner of Appeals and since in these matters, an important question of law involves and since no opportunity has been given to the appellant by the CESTAT, this Court is of the view to set aside the Final Orders in question and remit the matters to the file of CESTAT. Since the matters are liable to be remitted to the file of CESTAT, the substantial questions of law settled in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeals need not be decided. In fine, these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are allowed without cost and the Final Order Nos. 1130 to 1132 of 2008 passed by the CESTAT are set aside and the matters are remitted to the file of CESTAT. The CESTAT is directed to give sufficient opportunity to both sides and pass suitable orders on merit. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.