1994 (7) TMI 140

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ice of hearing of Stay application was issued. Shri V. Sridharan and Shri Kamaljeet Singh, Ld. Advocates appeared on behalf of the appellants. Shri V. Sridharan stated that there is denial of principle of natural justice. The adjudicating authority has passed the order without granting a personal hearing. He pleaded that they were issued a Show Cause Notice and the appellant had given an interim reply to the same, and further detailed reply was to be given as he wanted some information. He argued that at no point of time, the appellant had waived the right of personal hearing, and the Collector in no way could finally pass the order without giving them an opportunity of being heard personally. He cited the case of P.K. Goel, New Delhi v. CC .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to be submitted by 1-12-1992 but the same had not been received. Therefore, they were requested to submit their reply latest by 15-3-1993, positively, failing which the case will be decided on the basis of the records available in this office. All the parties again sent identical letters dated 5-3-1993 in which they stated that the illegal show cause notice issued by Shri S. Kak, Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi was duly replied vide their letter dated 26-11-1992 but they had not received any reply to their letter. It was further stated by the parties concerned that the competent appropriate authority should reply to them to enable them to supply the supplementary reply with the help of documentary evidence etc. M/s. Special Machines .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the party and examine the same." A perusal of the above shows that there is lapse on the part of the appellant for not furnishing the requisite information but an opportunity was given from time to time. Nevertheless it is also correct that no personal hearing was granted. The Tribunal has occasions to deal with similar situation in the matter reported in 1983 (12) E.L.T. 648 (P.K. Goel v. CC, Delhi). Relevant paragraphs are reproduced below : 3. The Departmental Representative submitted that the show cause notice specifically asked the Appellant whether the Appellant wanted to be heard in person. However, nothing was shown to us to prove that the Appellant waived personal hearing or that he was offered a hearing before final orders we .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X