9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 549X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shwara Rao, Advocate, for the Appellant. Dr. Nitish Birdi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. After examining the records and hearing both sides, we are of the view that the appeals are required to be summarily disposed of. Accordingly, after dispensing with pre-deposit, we take up the appeals. 2. The impugned order was passed in adjudication of a show- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iratabad, Hyderabad. If any of the noticees wish to peruse such documents, they may do so on any working day with prior appointment . (emphasis added) It is the case of the appellants that the relied-upon documents listed in Annexure - C to the show-cause notice were not supplied to them to enable them to reply to the notice. They repeatedly requested the adjudicating authority to defer adjudica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a half months. M/s. MSPL vide their letter dated 16-1-2004 requested further extension for three more months to reply to the show-cause notice. Till date they have neither replied to the show-cause notice nor requested for any personal hearing. In the present appeal, the appellants are contesting the averment of the Commissioner that they had not requested for personal hearing since 16-1-2004. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (DRI) Zonal Unit, Chennai could not deliver even xerox copies of the said documents to the noticee. The question remains whether the Additional Director-General (DRI) chose to issue the show-cause notice without seeing those documents. Still more woeful is the position of the adjudicating authority, which directed the party to get the above documents from the DRI Unit at Hyderabad but chose to pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
