9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the view that he correctly understood the judgment of M/s. Jesus Sales Corporation Ltd. [1996 (3) TMI 194 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] and decided the matter without affording opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner then, it was the heavy duty upon him to update himself with the laws as the said authority himself took the task of deciding the matter without the assistance of the applicant before him and, therefore, the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and which has already been interpreted by the various High Courts should not have been ignored, if he updated his knowledge by reading the judgments referred above wherein case of M/s. Jesus Sales Corporation Ltd. [1996 (3) TMI 194 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] has been considered an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals) Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi, whereby the learned Commissioner (Appeals) without affording any opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner has decided the petitioner's prayer for waiver of deposit of the duty and interest demanded and penalty imposed and for stay of the operation of the impugned order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) C.E. & S.T., Ranchi was of the view that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court delivered in the case of Union of India v. M/s Jesus Sales Corporation Ltd. [1996 (83) E.L.T. 486 (S.C.)], opportunity of hearing is not required before deciding the prayer for waiver of pre-deposit condition provided under the proviso t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds in the Act or Rules spelling out need to hear the party whose rights or interests are likely to be affected, requirement to follow fair procedure before taking a decision must be read into statute, unless statute provides otherwise. By a process of judicial interpretation, two rules have been evolved as representing the principles of natural justice in judicial process, including quasi judicial and administrative process. First, "no man shall be a judge in his own cause" and second, "hear the other side". Not only this, the Full Bench of Delhi High Court held that natural justice is another name of the commonsense justice. The Calcutta High Court in the case of Eveready Industries India Ltd. v. Union of India [2010 (257) E.L.T. 71 (Cal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of M/s. Jesus Sales Corporation Ltd. held that in the interest of fair play and natural justice, petitioner ought to have been given an opportunity of hearing. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that there is gross indiscipline and judicial impropriety on the part of the Commissioner (Appeals), who even after decision of this Court in M/s. Panch Sheel Udyog has passed the ex parte order in the present case. 5. We are of the considered opinion that one is not wise who claims that he is wise. One is wise who makes efforts to become more wise. We are constrained to observe as above because of the reason that if Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi was of the view that he correctly understo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of M/s. Jesus Sales Corporation Ltd. never laid down that opportunity of hearing is not required before passing any order under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and that position has been fully explained by various High Courts. There was clear direction of this Court in the case of M/s. Panch Sheel Udyog to the same authority to grant opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner of M/s. Panch Sheel Udyog in the similar and identical facts and circumstances, yet Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi without giving any reference to the decision of this Court in M/s. Panch Sheel Udyog passed the impugned order, which may amounts to gross contempt of this Court. However, looking to the poor knowledge of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dated 18th May, 2012. Such attitude of the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi certainly reflects his attitude towards litigant and also if subsequent order of rejection of the prayer for dispensing with from condition of pre-deposit of the amount for maintaining the appeal is correct then, by not hearing the appeal the Commissioner (Appeals) has caused loss to the revenue, which he could have avoided by giving opportunity of hearing to the appellant and that would have made him to understand the things more properly. If examined from this angle, which we have examined for the purpose of giving an illustration only then, also the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is certainly detrimental to the intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
