2015 (12) TMI 314

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 226 jurisdiction. Particularly so, because intricate questions of facts are involved. The case against the petitioner is that through various machinations he tried to inflate the purchase price, fabricate documents etc. for the purpose of getting extra DEPB benefit. - The matter should be tried before the Tribunal. - Matter remanded back - Petition disposed of. - W.P. No. 506 of 2013 - - - Date .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Maiti, learned Advocate for the respondents, submits that the writ petitioner was duly served, but deliberately did not appear before the Commissioner. In this type of case, I am of the opinion that the Tribunal is also empowered to go into the question whether an opportunity of hearing was given to the writ petitioner before the impugned order dated 30th April, 2013 was passed. Even other .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nal before entering into the merits of this case. If it is found that adequate notice was not given, the Tribunal may straight away remand the matter back to the Commissioner. If it is found that notice was duly given, the Tribunal will consider the appeal on merits upon giving an opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner. The appeal will be disposed of by a reasoned order within a period of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X