Registry tries to play spoilsport but does not succeed - One appeal against one order even if more than one Show Cause Notice is involved
THE Commissioner, Central Excise, Mumbai-III passed an Order-in-original no. 04-05/COMMR/M-III/WLH/2012-13 dated 30/08/ 3023 [ sic ] and the appellant filed “an” appeal before the CESTAT.
The CESTAT Registry issued a Show-Cause notice dated 6/07/2012 to the appellant directing them to file one more appeal in view of the fact that the impugned order deals with two show cause notices.
When the matter was heard by the CESTAT, the appellant drew the attention of the Bench to rule 6A of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 and submitted that only one appeal is required to be filed against one order even though the said order deals with more than one notice.
The Bench observed - "3. We have perused Rule 6A and find that the contention of the advocate is correct. Accordingly, the show cause notice does not survive and discharged."
A bit of history
- As regards the issue of the number of appeals that are required to be filed against an order-in-original dealing with more than one SCN, on account of contrary views taken by the Eastern Regional Bench & Southern Regional Bench, the President of the CEGAT (as it was then called) directed hearing of the said matter by a 5 Member Larger Bench. The LB in the case of Eicher Motors Ltd. [] held that one Appeal to the Tribunal would suffice where the impugned order is one irrespective of the number of SCNs. The Larger Bench also noted the amendment made to the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Amendment Rules, 1999 through Notification No. 1/CEGAT/99, dated 13-5-1999 (Ministry of Commerce Initiation) and by which Rule 6A was incorporated making the position explicit.
So, filing of single appeal is maintainable against a compendious order which deals with more than one show cause notice.
(See )