2010 (10) TMI 408 - HC - Central Excise

Natural justice - There is no threadbare discussion vis- -vis above three contentions raised - The Tribunal may have been justified in refusing to grant adjournment - Tribunal is not bound to adjourn the case merely because the adjournment is sought - Similarly, the Tribunal is not bound to transfer the case to the Division Bench merely because there was a request made in that behalf - The Tribunal was bound to consider and appreciate the written submissions which were filed on record - The written submissions were not such which one could brush aside without application of mind - The impugned order does not disclose any application of mind or consideration to the contentions raised - Held that the impugned order is in breach of principles of natural justice as such bad in law - Hence, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against the order allowing Revenue's appeal and rejecting respondent's cross-objection.

Analysis:
The High Court analyzed the impugned order, finding it cryptic and unreasoned. The Court noted that the Tribunal did not consider the three contentions raised by the respondent, which were crucial to the case. The Court emphasized that the Tribunal should have considered and appreciated the written submissions filed on record, as they were not dismissible without proper scrutiny. The Court held that the impugned order lacked an application of mind and consideration of the contentions, leading to a breach of natural justice and rendering it bad in law.

The Court further observed that the Tribunal's refusal to grant adjournment or transfer the case to the Division Bench was within its discretion. However, the Tribunal was obligated to give due consideration to the written submissions and address the contentions raised by the parties. Since the impugned order failed to meet this standard, the Court set it aside and remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for a fresh consideration on its own merits, with all rival contentions to be kept open. No costs were awarded in this decision.