Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
M/S. M.P. Tobacco Ltd. vs C.C.E. Raipur on 9 February, 2001
ORDER
S.S. Kang:
1. The applicants filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty.
2. The contention of the applicants is that the Commissioner (Appeals) directed the applicants to deposit the penalty amount for hearing of the appeal without granting them an opportunity of personal hearing and, thereafter, the appeal was dismissed for non-compliance to the provisions of Sec. 35 F of the Act. The contention of the applicants is that the plea of financial hardship raised in the applicants for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty is not considered by the Commissioner while passing the interim order.
3. The appellants filed an appeal against adjudication order alongwith an application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty and in the application the applicants specifically pleaded the financial hardship. Without considering this plea of the appellants, the Commissioner (Appeals), without granting an opportunity of personal hearing, decided the application for waiver of pre-deposit and, thereafter, without issuing any notice, the appeal was dismissed for non-compliance to the provisions of Sec. 35 F of the Act, hence the impugned order is passed in violation to the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the pre-deposit of penalty is waived for hearing of the appeal.
4. With the consent of both the parties, the appeal is being taken up for hearing.
5. As discussed above, the impugned order is passed in violation to the principles of natural justice, hence is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the application for waiver of pre-deposit afresh after affording an opportunity of personal afresh after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants and, thereafter, to proceed in accordance with law. The appeal is disposed of byway of remand.
(Dictated in Court).