9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 862X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e present case, admittedly, the summons were issued to the petitioner. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner entered appearance in the proceedings before the respondent on 04.03.2014 itself. Thus, there is a possibility that the petitioner would not have informed about the summons to their counsel regarding the personal hearing. Under those circumstances, the counsel was not aware of the date of personal hearing and the same resulted in passing of the final order without hearing the learned counsel who entered appearance on behalf of the writ petitioner. This Court is of an opinion that the petitioner has to be provided with an opportunity of personal hearing for the purpose of submitting the judgments, documents and the ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he final order without providing opportunity to the petitioner. 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent refer to Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 which stipulates Service of decisions, orders, summons, etc. Sub-clause (1)(a) enumerates that by tendering the decision, order, summons or notice, or sending it by registered post with acknowledgment due, or by speed post with proof of delivery or by courier approved by the Central Board of Excise and Customs constituted under the Central Boards of Revenue Act, 1963 to the person for whom it is intended or his authorised agent, if any . Relying on the above provisions of the Central Excise Act, the learned Senior Standing Counsel reiterated tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances, the Courts are bound to consider whether the denial of opportunity caused certain prejudice to the interest of the person aggrieved. In the present case, admittedly, the summons were issued to the petitioner. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner entered appearance in the proceedings before the respondent on 04.03.2014 itself. Thus, there is a possibility that the petitioner would not have informed about the summons to their counsel regarding the personal hearing. Under those circumstances, the counsel was not aware of the date of personal hearing and the same resulted in passing of the final order without hearing the learned counsel who entered appearance on behalf of the writ petitioner. 8. In paragraphs 5 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said submission, this Court is of an opinion that the petitioner has to be provided with an opportunity of personal hearing for the purpose of submitting the judgments, documents and the grounds raised to defend their case. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the respondent in proceedings No. C.No.V/15/BSS/2013-ADC-STA-III in Order in Original No.11/2014 (ST) dated 10.04.2014 is quashed and the matter is remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration after providing an opportunity to the learned counsel who entered appearance on behalf of the petitioner and thereafter pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. Such exercise is directed to be done within a period of four months fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
