2014 (9) TMI 699

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er Mr. S.P. Pradhan has been pulled up by this Court. He had not implemented and carried out the orders and directions of this Court which were specific and clear. We do not see how the approach of the officer in this case can be countenanced even in the present matter. When he is aware of the requirement of giving a personal hearing before a adverse order is passed, then, the impugned order shows .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the Petitioners and Mr.Kantharia appearing for the Respondents. The claims/applications for refund of CENVAT credit and for the period specified therein have indeed been decided without the Petitioners being given a personal hearing. In the facts and circumstances of the case and without deciding any larger issue we are of the opinion that the approach of the authorities in dealing with claims .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... if there is partial or marginal benefit granted under such order that would not be sufficient inasmuch as dispensing with the above requirements and which is fundamental and basic to any adjudication should not become a general rule. 4. On earlier occasions the Deputy Commissioner Service Tax, Division-VI, Mumbai-II and who has passed the impugned order Mr. S.P. Pradhan has been pulled up by th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X