IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
S.T.A.No.5 of 2008
Date of Decision:- 09.03.2009
Commissioner of Central Excise Commissionerate,
Jalandhar (Hqrs. at Chandigarh) ....Appellant(s)
vs.
M/s.Grover Suri & Associates, Lally Niwas,
Jalandhar ....Respondent(s)
***
CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
***
Present:- Mr.Sanjiv Kaushik, Advocate
for Indirect Taxes.
***
1.Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment?
2.To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
***
M.M.KUMAR, J.
The Revenue has filed the instant appeal under Section 35 (G)
of the Central Excise Act, 1944 ( for brevity ‘the Act’) read with Section 83
of the Finance Act, 1994 challenging order dated October 15, 2007
(Annexure P-4) passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate
Tribunal, New Delhi (for brevity the Tribunal).
In para 5 of the order, there are categorical findings that the
respondent-assessee was not given reasonable opportunity of hearing which
is violative of the principles of natural justice. The order dated 17.11.2006
passed by the Revisional Authority i.e. Commissioner, Central Excise and
S.T.A.No.5 of 2008 -2-
Customs has been set aside with liberty to him to pass a fresh order after
affording proper opportunity of hearing to the respondent.
Having heard the learned counsel, we find that there is no
room to entertain the instant appeal because the Tribunal has recorded a
categoric finding that the principles of natural justice were required to be
observed and the matter has been remanded to the Commissioner,
Central Excise and Customs, for fresh decision after affording proper
opportunity of hearing to the respondent.
This appeal does not warrant admission and accordingly, the
same is dismissed.
( M.M.KUMAR )
JUDGE
March 09, 2009 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH )
poonam JUDGE