TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 809X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xpose the allegation in clear terms to enable an assessee to lead defence. Failure to do so, makes the adjudication fatal. Liability being intended to be determined, Show cause notice is the first course of natural justice. That should clearly bring out the allegation. Such proposition of law is laid down in the case of CCE Nagpur vs. Ballarpur Industries Ltd. [2007 (8) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] and the CCE Mumbai vs. Toyo Engg. India Ltd. [2006 (8) TMI 184 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. The proposition of law in Brindawan Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner reported in [2007 (6) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] and Metal Forging vs. Union of India reported in [2002 (11) TMI 90 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] is also to the said effect. - Deci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. Commissioner, Customs, Ludhiana on 07.10.1998, outdoor patients were charged nominal fee and they were not treated free as required by the Notification. Other than this there was no other specific cause stated therein. 2.1. The allegation in the Show Cause Notice was challenged by the appellant filing reply to the show cause notice stating that the amount of ₹ 10/- charged from the patient cannot be treated as fee charged from OPD patients for their treatment. This was not fee charged for treatment of poor as has been held by Tribunal in the matter of M.S. Ramaiah Medical Teaching Hospital Vs. CC, Bangalore [2005 (184) ELT) 82] and benefit of Notification No.64/88 is not deniable on extraneous considerations. 2.2. It was furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssued on regular basis. In circulars, the appellant had mentioned the number of beds kept reserved in different departments of the hospital. Therefore, there was no violation of any condition of the notification. 2.5. It was also submssion on behalf of the appellant that Show Cause Notice confined the allegation to the effect that outdoor patients having been charged nominal fees were not treated free as required by the notification. But such allegation was rebutted as aforesaid for which there is no further cause to deny benefit of the Notification. Adjudicating authority exceeded his jurisdiction travelling beyond the Show Cause Notice. Accordingly such proceeding is liable to be quashed and adjudication order is required to be set asi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Tribunal. If an appellant is not put to notice as to the nature of contravention and basis thereof, that violates principles of natural justice as has been held in the case of Amrit Foods Vs. CCE, UP 2005 (190) ELT 433 (SC). Similarly, the matter of levy of duty and penalty as well as interest is not a matter of casual exercise intended by law. Invoking of jurisdiction depends on the foundation of Show Cause Notice as has been held in the case of CCE, Nagpur Vs. Ballarpur Industries Ltd. [2007 (215) ELT 489 (SC)]. To this effect, the judgement of the apex court is also in the case of CC, Mumbai Vs. Toyo Engineering India Ltd. [2006 (201) ELT 513 (SC)]. 2.9. Supporting order of adjudication, ld. JCDR submitted that: (1) Last para ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ediwell Hospital s Case. When appellant failed to discharge continuous obligations, it was put to notice about violation of all conditions of the notification with one expressly stated example in the SCN. Therefore adjudication cannot be said to be beyond SCN. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records. 4. This is second round of litigation before Tribunal. Page 3 of the Show cause notice dated 16.09.2000 available at page 57 of the appeal folder discloses specific allegation against the appellant. According to such allegation, appellant charged nominal fee for which free service to poor patients was not provided. 5. In the first round of litigation, Tribunal in terms of Final Order No. 281/2006-Cus dated 10.8.06 (ref: page 124 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e remand. The show cause notice being the foundation of adjudication that is required to expose the allegation in clear terms to enable an assessee to lead defence. Failure to do so, makes the adjudication fatal. Liability being intended to be determined, Show cause notice is the first course of natural justice. That should clearly bring out the allegation. Such proposition of law is laid down in the case of CCE Nagpur vs. Ballarpur Industries Ltd. [2007 (215) ELT 489 (SC)] and the CCE Mumbai vs. Toyo Engg. India Ltd. [2006 (201) ELT 513 (SC)]. The proposition of law in Brindawan Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner reported in 2007 (213) ELT 287 (SC) and Metal Forging vs. Union of India reported in 2002 (146) ELT 241 (SC) is also to the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
