9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 973X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he order also does not record that there was a request for adjournment - the order passed without considering the defence of the appellant raised in their letter dated 7.11.2000, without granting personal hearing is in gross violation of principles of natural justice - matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority to decide after granting due opportunity to the appellants to defend their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in respect of computer system manufacture/ the details of computer system assembly were identified by Shri Hemant A Vartak, partner of the appellant firm. The details of computer assembly and supply are listed in Annexure A B to the show-cause notice. While Annexure-A listed the computer system supplied in the guise of parts/ full computer, the Annexure B listed the computer systems assembled ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as per direction, they had filed written submissions dated 7.11.2000 along with documentary evidence. It has been argued that the said officer was transferred and subsequently hearing was fixed on 10.1.2001 before Shri B.S. Negi, a new adjudicating authority- The appellant sought adjournment on 10.1.2001 on the ground that Consultant was out of station. It has been argued that the said letter has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the appellant raised in their letter dated 7.11.2000, without granting personal hearing is in gross violation of principles of natural justice. The impugned order also does not deal with this specific claims made by the appellant regarding denial of the principles of natural justice by the original adjudicating authority. It is seen that these issues were specifically raised in appeal before C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
