ORDER
P.S. Bajaj
1. This appeal has been directed by the appellants against the Order-in-Appeal dated 25.8.2000 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the Order in-Original dated 2.7.99 of the Assistant Commissioner, crediting their refund claim to the Consumers Welfare Fund.
2. The sole grievance of the appellants against the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is that they were not heard and their request for adjournment was wrongly declined by the Commissioner (Appeals) before passing the order. Shri N.N. Jindal, appearing for the appellants has stated that on the date of hearing, his wife sick at Bombay and he had sent a request for adjournment but the same was not allowed and this has resulted in miscarriage of justice.
3. Ld. SDR has not disputed that this impugned order had been passed without giving proper hearing to the appellants. He has no objection if the matter is sent back to the concerned Commissioner (Appeals) for de novo hearing of the appeal after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellants.
4. We have also perused the impugned order-in-appeal of the Commissioner (Appeals) and its perusal shows that on 22.6.2000 the date fixed by the Commissioner (Appeals), request was made by the appellants for adjournment but the same was declined without any sufficient cause.
Commissioner (Appeals) should have adjourned the appeal on the request of the appellants on the ground of illness of the wife of Shri N.N.Jindal, proprietor of the appellants. The impugned order apparently has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice and deserves to be set aside.
5. In view of the discussions above, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and the matter is sent back to him for redecision of the appeal after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellants. The appeal of the appellants accordingly stands accepted by way of remand.
(Pronounced in the Court)