ORDER
G.N. Srinivasan, Member (J)
1. This is an appeal filed by the appellants against the decision of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai made in Order-in-Appeal No. GS/1028/B-I/93 received by the assessee on 6.10.1993 whereunder the Collector (Appeals) have denied modvat credit on the inputs on the basis of documents issued two years prior to the date of availment of credit and therefore it was irregularly taken. In this case, the Show Cause Notice dated 3.2.1992 was issued by the Superintendent charging the appellants that they had taken modvat credit to the tune of Rs. 38,953.62 on the ground that the credit was not admissible as per Trade Notice 89/1989 dated 3.11.1989. The appellants replied by its letter dated 29.11.1989 and by order dated 14.9.1992 A.C. confirmed the demand. Against which appeal was filed and the Collector (Appeals) who by the impugned order confirmed the same on the ground that conditions of Trade Notice were not complied with. Hence the present appeal.
2. Shri Ragesh Mehta, Id. Counsel, appearing for the appellant that the Trade Notice No. 89/89 dated 3.11.1989 have been issued regarding removal of inputs under Rule 57F(2). Shri Mehta emphasises the fact that this is a case where Rule 571 is not at all applicable. Therefore, reference to Rule 57F(2) is absolutely wrong as the facts do not warrant the same. He further emphasises the fact that Show Cause Notice is too cryptic and vague in as much as it does not show the basis on which the Superintendent comes to the prima facie conclusion that the Trade Notice 89/1989 has not been complied with. He emphasises that it has no use simply mentioning the particulars of the duty paying documents.
3. As against this Shri K.L. Ramteke, Id. DR adopts the reasoning and states the finding given by the A.C. is clearly in favour of the Department.
4. I have considered the rival submissions. When we look into the Show Cause Notice the Annexure to the Show Cause Notice states as follows:
The credit is not admissible as per Trade Notice No. 89/1989 dated 3.11.1989 issued by Collector of Central Excise, Mumbai-2 hence the same is receivable under Rule 571.
5. It is axiomatic that quasi-judicial proceedings with which we are concerned here, the Show Cause Notice must give the basis on which the duty is sought to be collected. The Show Cause Notice does not state as to how trade notice No. 89/1989 issued on 3.11.1989 would be applicable to the facts of the case and how the appellant has transgressed ‘the provisions thereof. No doubt the A.C. has given full detailed order as also the Collector (Appeals) but yet I am of the view that the quasi judicial authorities cannot proceed unless the basis on which the proceedings are initiated is reflected in the Show Cause Notice. Hence I am of the view that the entire proceedings by the lower authorities is wrong in law and I, therefore, set aside the same granting consequential relief.
6. Appeal allowed.
(Dictated in court).