2006 (7) TMI 447 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Liability of duty, penalty, and interest on the appellants due to the predecessor's actions. Lack of opportunity for the appellants to defend their case before the Adjudicating authority.

In this case, the appellants purchased a running factory from Madhya Pradesh Financial Corporation and obtained registration in 1998. Subsequently, the Suptd. of Central Excise informed the appellants of duty liability on their predecessor. The Dy. Commissioner held the appellants liable for duty, penalty, and interest, as show cause notices were issued before the appellants took over the unit. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants.

The advocate for the appellants argued that they were not given a chance to defend their case before the Adjudicating authority despite being registered with the department. He contended that any liability accruing after the takeover should involve their participation. On the other hand, the D.R. argued that the appellants should have been aware of any pending liability of the predecessor when applying for registration.

The Tribunal found that the appellants were not made party to the proceedings after obtaining registration, even though duty liability was confirmed post-registration. It was noted that the liability was not confirmed at the time of the purchase agreement in 1998. The Tribunal agreed with the appellants that any liability should have been fastened upon them after proper notice. The impugned order was set aside, and the case was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for a fresh consideration after granting the appellants an opportunity for a personal hearing.

Therefore, the Tribunal directed the Revenue to provide copies of show cause notices to the appellants and allow them a reasonable opportunity to defend their case before the lower authorities. The appeal was allowed by way of remand to ensure a fair hearing for the appellants.