9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (4) TMI 139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out for hearing and heard finally. 2.The petitioner has filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Appeals, Central Excise (second respondent) under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The petitioner simultaneously moved an application under Section 35F of the Act seeking stay of the execution of the orders and dues which were appealed against. For reasons which we find it difficult to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssible for the petitioner to do so. The second respondent thereupon made an order dated March 19/23, 1998 impugned in this writ petition, dismissing the stay application on the ground that the petitioner did not turn up for the personal hearing and that as he was busy with the election duty which he was to attend, he was unable to hear the matter before March 31, 1998. Being aggrieved thereby, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rdly quasi-judicial. We refrain from saying anything further. 5.In the result, we are satisfied that the impugned order needs to be quashed and set side. The impugned order of the second respondent dated March 19/23, 1998 is hereby quashed and set aside. The application of the petitioner made under Section 35F of the Act is restored to file and the second respondent is hereby directed to take up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
