1987 (7) TMI 443 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Violation of principles of natural justice in the adjudication process.
2. Denial of fair hearing by the Collector.
3. Request for adjournment not considered properly.

Analysis:
1. The judgment involves two appeals against the same order-in-original. The appellants contended that the principles of natural justice were violated during the adjudication process. The proceedings began in 1977, with personal hearings before different Collectors. The final Collector did not provide copies of earlier hearing records despite requests, leading to a violation of natural justice. The appellants argued that without these records, they couldn't ensure all submissions were duly recorded, justifying their request. The failure to provide records and proceed with adjudication was deemed a breach of natural justice by the Tribunal.

2. The Collector's comment on the appellants adopting dilatory tactics was deemed unjustified. The appellants had requested copies of records after various delays in the adjudication process, including a personal hearing fixed more than two years later. The Tribunal found the appellants' requests reasonable, considering the prolonged process and the need to review earlier submissions. The Collector's failure to respond to these requests and proceed with adjudication without addressing them was seen as haste, error, and a violation of natural justice.

3. In the case of the second appellant, a request for adjournment was made due to a change in personnel handling the matter and the age of the case. The appellants sought time to gather relevant documents, but the Collector proceeded with adjudication without granting the adjournment or informing the appellants. The Tribunal found the denial of adjournment unjustified, especially considering the circumstances and the timely nature of the request. The failure to communicate the decision on adjournment and proceeding with adjudication without proper consideration led to a denial of a fair hearing.

In conclusion, both appeals were allowed, setting aside the Collector's order and remitting the matter for fresh adjudication to ensure compliance with principles of natural justice and fair hearing.