Central Excise – Service of summon, Opportunity of personal hearing - The ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that the summons ought to have been sent to the counsel who was representing the case of the petitioner but the respondent sent summons to the petitioner directly – due to non-appearance of the ld. counsel the final order was passed without providing opportunity to the ld. counsel who represented the case of the petitioner – challenge to Order-in-Original passed by the respondent – HELD - in all cases, the parties aggrieved are bound to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority. However, in certain circumstances, the Courts are bound to consider whether the denial of opportunity caused prejudice to the interest of the person aggrieved. In the present case, the ld. counsel for the petitioner entered appearance in the proceedings before the respondent - 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 ld. counsel - 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 - matter is remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration after providing an opportunity to the ld. counsel who entered appearance on behalf of the petitioner and thereafter pass final orders on merits - writ petition stands disposed of

Quick Search


Create Account

Log In

Forgot Password

Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page