2013 (7) TMI 128

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... atural justice breached - order would be set aside - Petitioner had a right to know the outcome of their application - commissioner should issue a notice for further hearing – petition allowed in the favour of the assessee.
AKIL KURESHI AND MS. SONIA GOKANI, JJ. For the Appellant : Devan Parikh and Nirav P. Shah. For the Respondent : R.J. Oza. ORDER:- PER : Akil Kureshi Heard learned advocates for the parties for final disposal of the petition. Petitioners have challenged an order dated 29th January 2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, SuratII [as Annexure-G to the petition] by which he was pleased to confirm various excise duty demands alongwith interest and penalties. Conscious that against such order, s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... reply and sought cross examination of the buyers; that the calculation has been done wrongly as benefit of cumduty has not been given to them; that the calculations should be done correctly, notwithstanding the fact that they are disputing the whole demand; that the estimation done on the basis of gas consumption is patently wrong; that they would present their case further after cross examination and translation." He, however, proceeded to deal with the petitioners' request for cross examination in paragraph 14.1 of the order and rejected such a request. He thereupon proceeded to examine the issues at length and ultimately passed the final order; as noted above, confirming various duty demands with interest and penalties. Having heard l .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... giving reasons, he could have rejected it. We wonder what would have happened, if he was inclined to accept such a request. In such a situation, he himself could not have finally disposed of the show cause notice proceedings. In either case, the petitioners had a right to know the outcome of their application. Merely because the Commissioner was of the opinion that the petitioners had made such a request somewhat belatedly, would not permit him to, in the facts of the present case, deal with such an application only in the final order itself. Sum total of this discussion is that we are inclined to setaside the impugned order and request the adjudicating authority to pass a separate order on the petitioners' application/request letter for g .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X