K.S. Tobacco Co. (P) Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 7 October, 2003

0
75
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Bangalore
K.S. Tobacco Co. (P) Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 7 October, 2003
Equivalent citations: 2004 (92) ECC 159, 2003 (158) ELT 820 Tri Bang
Bench: G B Deva, M T K.C.


ORDER

1. G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J) (Oral) – After hearing for some time with reference the stay petition filed by the party we find that the matter itself can be disposed of on the limited issue. Accordingly appeals were taken up for regular hearing with the consent of both sides.

2. It was submitted by the Counsel that apart from the merits and demerits of the case, the impugned order suffers from denial of principles of natural justice inasmuch as effective hearing has not been granted before passing the order. He said that final hearing was fixed on 8-5-2003 and since the party could not attend on that date due to personal difficulties, he requested for an adjournment. Neither the said adjournment was refused nor considered and in the absence of any communication, the party has filed a further detailed reply on 2-7-2003. Subsequently, to their surprise they received order dated 16-6-2003 on 17-7-2003.

3. Smt. Radha Arun appearing for the Revenue justified the action of the Department in passing the impugned order because though several opportunities were given to the party, the same were not availed of by them. She said that the adjudicating authority/Commissioner had no alternative but to pass an ex parte order.

4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. We find that number of opportunities were given to the party as rightly pointed out by the DR. Final hearing was fixed on 8-5-2003 and no order has been passed on that date and since the Commissioner has passed an order only on 16-6-2003 more than a month from that date, it was just appropriate to intimate the party and grant one more hearing in the meanwhile. Since this has not been done, in the interest of justice, we are of the view that one more opportunity is to be given. In the view we have taken, the matter is remanded to the concerned adjudicating authority to examine the issue afresh and to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law on providing an opportunity to the party. We make it clear that party also should cooperate with the Department for the speedy disposal of the matter.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *