ORDER
J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)
1. This application was argued by Shri M.H. Patil, Advocate. Revenue was represented by Shri Deepak Kumar, SDR.
2. The Deputy Commissioner confirmed duty amounting to Rs. 3,08,882.01 against the assessee unit. He also ordered duty to be collected on the amount of Rs. 59,731/- representing the surplus on sales tax collected but not paid and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/-. Against this order the assessee filed an appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) directed them to deposit the entire disputed amounts and penalties as a pre-condition to hearing of their appeal. The assessees applied for re-consideration of the order. The Commissioner in the impugned order dismissed the appeal for non-compliance of provisions of Section 35L. Hence the present appeal and the application for stay.
3. Shri M.H. Patil submits that although in terms of U.O.I. v. Jesus Sales Corporation judgment of the Supreme Court 1996 (83) E.L.T. 486 the Commissioner could pass orders on the stay application without inviting the applicants for hearing, provided he looked into all the relevant factors; before disposal of the appeal finally, he was required to give a chance to the assessee to be heard. In support of his submission he cites the Tribunal’s Order Nos. C-I/1780-81/WZB, dated 15-7-1999 1999 (113) E.L.T. 89 (Tribunal), We have seen the cited order. We find that the learned Commissioner was wrong in dismissing the appeal before him without giving an opportunity to the assessee to state their case. We find that the sum confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner is very small and that he has also not quantified duty payable on account of sales tax retained by the assessee. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remand the proceedings back to the learned Commissioner with the direction that he shall directly hear the assessee on merits and decide the issue.
4. The stay application also stands disposed of.