2016 (8) TMI 705

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s dated 08-12-2014, 13-12-2014, 27-01-2015 and 05-02-2015. These letters were much subsequent to the date of hearing conducted by Settlement Commissioner. The copies of said letters/documents were also never provided to the petitioners. The petitioners had filed specific application seeking documents. Provisions of Section 32-J of the Excise Act clearly entitles the applicant to provide certified copies of any such report or part thereof. Considering the above, the said letters appear to have been read while passing the impugned order without giving copies of the same to the petitioners and also without bringing it to the knowledge of petitioners. Such an order is certainly not in consonance with the cardinal principles of natural justi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s One Thousand Five Hundred Twenty Nine). The jaggery is seized from warehouse. The petitioners had filed settlement application under section 32-E of the Excise Act. Pursuant thereto, impugned order is passed. 4. Mr. Kolte, learned counsel for petitioners submits that hearing was conducted on 02-12-2014 and further 10 (ten) days time was given to the parties to make the submissions. Subsequent to the hearing being conducted, respondents filed additional documents with its letters dated 08-12-2014, 13-12-2014, 27-01-2015 and 05-02-2015 and made submissions thereafter also. The petitioners were not put notice about said letters being filed. The petitioners on 05-11-2014 had specifically filed application and thereby demanded the documents .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... espective parties are at ad-idem that petitioners have paid duty as demanded in the show cause notice i.e. more than amount which has been settled by the Settlement Commissioner. 7. It is also not disputed fact that Settlement Commissioner had conducted enquiry on 02-12-2014 and, thereafter, granted ten days more time to make further submissions, if any. Perusal of impugned order, it is manifest that revenue subsequently relied on letters dated 08-12-2014, 13-12-2014, 27-01-2015 and 05-02-2015. These letters were much subsequent to the date of hearing conducted by Settlement Commissioner. The copies of said letters/documents were also never provided to the petitioners. The petitioners had filed specific application seeking documents. Pro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X