9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Challenge to orders of the Custom, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal for lack of disclosure of reasons. 2. Violation of principles of natural justice due to non-disclosure of reasons in the impugned orders. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: The petitions involved identical controversies regarding demands of excise duty for specific periods. The petitioners claimed exemption based on a government notification but were denied by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise. Subsequent appeals and revisions were dismissed by the Collector (Appeals) and the Custom, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, leading to the current challenge. The main contention was the lack of disclosure of reasons in the appellate tribunal's orders, rendering them invalid. Issue 2: The judgment emphasized the importance of providing reasons in support of orders by statutory functionaries as a fundamental aspect of natural justice. It was highlighted that the absence of reasons in the impugned orders violated this principle, making them legally flawed. Both parties agreed that the orders of the appellate tribunal were deficient in this regard and warranted being set aside. The judgment concluded by allowing the writ petitions partially, quashing the impugned orders dated 22nd June, 1983, and remitting the matter back to the Custom, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal for a fresh consideration. The tribunal was directed to provide a detailed and reasoned order after affording the concerned parties due opportunity. The decision underscored the significance of disclosing reasons in administrative or quasi-judicial orders to ensure a rational nexus between facts and conclusions, thereby upholding the principles of natural justice.
|
