2013 (4) TMI 426 - AT - Service Tax

Rejection of Appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals-II) on the ground as barred by limitation, since the appeal was preferred with an abnormal delay of two years after the date of adjudication order - The Appellate Commissioner (Appeals) called for a factual report from the Assistant Commissioner, Chittaurgarh and received a report from the said authority to the effect that the adjudication order dated 17.4.2009 was sent to the appellant vide dispatch order No.3242 dated 17.4.2009 under registered post and the contention of the appellant regarding receipt of the impugned order on 24.3.2011 as pleaded in the appeal grounds was incorrect - Held that - All process followed by the appellate authority constitutes serious violation of due process and transgresses principles of natural justice. It is axiomatic that a quasi-judicial authority cannot record any conclusion on the basis of material without notice to and behind the back of a party to the lis. The impugned Order in Appeal cannot therefore, be sustained and is quashed. The matter is remitted to the appellate authority for de novo determination and the appellate authority shall proceed to determine the appeal after furnishing a copy of the report received from Assistant Commissioner, Chittaurgarh, to the appellant herein.

Summary

Issues: Violation of due process and principles of natural justice in the appellate authority's decision-making process.

The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI, delivered by Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, addresses the violation of due process and principles of natural justice in the decision-making process of the appellate authority. The three appeals under consideration involve similar factual backgrounds and were disposed of collectively due to their narrow campus. The main issue in Appeal No.91/2012 was the rejection of the appellant's appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals-II), Central Excise, Jaipur on the grounds of limitation, as the appeal was filed two years after the adjudication order. The Appellate Commissioner's reliance on a report from the Assistant Commissioner, Chittaurgarh, without providing a copy to the appellant, was deemed a serious violation of due process and natural justice.

The judgment emphasized that a quasi-judicial authority cannot reach conclusions based on material without notifying the concerned party and conducting proceedings behind their back. The impugned Order in Appeal was considered unsustainable due to this procedural irregularity and was consequently quashed. The matter was remitted back to the appellate authority for fresh determination, with a directive to provide the appellant with a copy of the report from the Assistant Commissioner, Chittaurgarh, before proceeding further. This decision aimed to uphold the fundamental principles of natural justice and fairness in the adjudication process.

Similarly, Service Tax Appeal No.92 and 93/2012 faced a similar issue of due process violation in the decision-making process. The Orders in Appeal for these appeals were also quashed, and the matters were remitted to the Commissioner (Appeals) with instructions mirroring those in Service Tax Appeal No.91/2012. The judgment concluded without any order as to costs, emphasizing the importance of adhering to procedural fairness and natural justice in administrative and quasi-judicial proceedings. The decision highlighted the significance of transparency, notice, and fair play in upholding the integrity of the adjudicatory process.