NEW TOBACCO CO. LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Government of India in Ministry of Industries declared an industrial policy granting certain concessions to the north -eastern region of India. By the said notification exemptions were granted in respect of goods specified in the 1st Schedule and 2nd Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Cigarette was one of the goods that was entitled to the benefit of exemptions. The appellant (New Tobacco Company) who enjoyed the benefits claimed refund of an amount of Rs. 1,89,45,120/ -. The claim was rejected and show cause notice was issued for payment of excise duty for the month of July and August, 2000. The show cause notice was challenged in W.P. (C) 446/2001. The learned single Judge passed an interim order directing the refund and also directed the appellant (herein) to pay the excise duty from the month of July, 2000 onwards. Despite the interim order of this Court refund was not granted. The writ petition finally came to be allowed. The show cause notice was quashed and the interim order of refund was confirmed. A writ appeal filed by the department also came to be dismissed.

(2.) THE Central Government brought about an amendment to Section 154 of the Finance Act, 2003 whereby the exemptions came to be withdrawn retrospectively. The Supreme Court in R.C. Tobacco (P) Ltd. v. Union of India and Anr. reported in : (2005) 7 SCC 725 : 2005 (188) E.L.T. 129 upheld the constitutional validity of Section 154 (withdrawing the concessions retrospectively). The Commissioner of Central Excise (CCE), in view of the decision of the Supreme Court, revived the earlier notice (issued) and passed the final order of adjudication directing payment of excise duty from July, 2000 onwards till then with interest at the rate of 24 percent. The appellant aggrieved by the said order filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal. An application for stay of the order of the CCE was also filed. The Tribunal while hearing on the stay application passed orders on merits on the main matter and dismissed the appeal in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in R.C. Tobacco (supra) case holding that the order 'of withdrawal of concessions retrospectively' by virtue of Section 154 is valid and therefore the appellant has no right to challenge the order of the CCE. Against the said order an appeal was also filed before this Court. This Court confirmed the order of the Tribunal. The appellant filed an appeal before the Supreme Court - Civil Appeal 2011/2014 [2014 (310) E.L.T. A85 (S.C.)]. The Supreme Court passed the following order.

(3.) IT is the contention of the appellant (herein) that the Tribunal in the first instance did not deal with the questions that arose in the appeal: and upon the decision of the Tribunal, on merits the substantial questions of law have to be framed. The Tribunal hastily disposed of the appeal while hearing on the stay application. Therefore, the Tribunal did not consider all the relevant facts and the law applicable to the facts in deciding the appeal. It is therefore submitted that it is just and proper that the matter be remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and disposal on merit by giving an opportunity to both the parties and depending upon the result of the order of the Tribunal the next course of action has to be taken by the parties. In that view of the matter it is submitted that the order of the Tribunal is to be set aside and the matter is to be remanded for fresh consideration.