Natural justice and effective hearing warranted remand, but only on compliance with pre-deposit and reply directions.

Denial of effective opportunity to reply and be heard justified setting aside the adjudication order, because the demand and penalties had been confirmed without a reply from the appellant being considered. The Tribunal held that fresh consideration was required in the interest of justice and remanded the matter for reconsideration. The remand was made conditional on deposit of a specified amount and filing of a reply within the stipulated time, so the matter could proceed only on compliance with those directions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudication order deserved to be set aside and the matter remanded on the ground of denial of reasonable opportunity and principles of natural justice, and whether such remand could be made subject to a pre-deposit condition.

Analysis: The appellant had sought time to reply and several opportunities of personal hearing had been granted, but no reply was filed before the adjudicating authority. Even so, the Tribunal found that the demand and penalties had been confirmed without the benefit of a reply and without effective hearing, and therefore the matter required reconsideration in the interest of justice. The Tribunal accepted that a remand was appropriate, but directed that it be made conditional upon deposit of a specified amount and filing of a reply within the stipulated time.

Conclusion: The order of adjudication was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration, subject to compliance with the pre-deposit and reply directions.

---