ORDER
S.S. Kang, Member (J)
1. The appellants, vide letter dated 8-12-2000 made a request to decide the appeal on merits. After hearing the ld. S.D.R., the appeal is admitted.
2. The applicants filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty. The contention of applicants is that against the adjudication order, whereby the demand was confirmed and penalty was imposed, the applicants filed appeal along with application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals), without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the applicants, passed an interim order and directed the applicants to deposit the duty amount. Thereafter, without issuing any notice, the appeal filed by the applicants was dismissed vide impugned order. The applicants relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Neo Sack Ltd. v C.C.E. reported in 2000 (119) E.L.T. 522 (M.P.).
3. The application for waiver of pre-deposit was dismissed without affording an opportunity of personal hearing and thereafter the appeal was dismissed without any notice. In view of the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the impugned order is passed in violation to the principles of natural justice. Hence the pre-deposit of duty and penalty is waived for hearing of the appeal.
4. With the consent of ld. D.R., the appeal is being taken up for disposal.
5. As discussed above, the impugned order is passed in violation to the principles of natural justice and hence is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals), for deciding afresh the application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants and, thereafter, to proceed with the appeal in accordance with law.