Board overturns Collector's decision on Excise duty & penalty due to lack of natural justice.

The Board set aside the Collector's order in a case involving the appellant, a company, who was ordered to pay Central Excise duty and a penalty for manufacturing asbestos packing without payment of duty. The appellant argued that natural justice was denied as the case was adjudicated ex parte without a personal hearing or document inspection. The Board found that crucial communication was not properly sent to the appellant, leading to doubts about their awareness. Consequently, the Board remanded the case for de novo adjudication, emphasizing the importance of affording the appellant a full opportunity to present their defense while upholding natural justice principles.

---

---

Issues:
Violation of natural justice in ex parte adjudication without a personal hearing and inspection of records.

Analysis:
The appeal involved a case where the appellant, a company, was ordered to pay Central Excise duty and a penalty for manufacturing and clearing asbestos packing without payment of duty. The show cause notice was issued on 25-11-1980, and the appellant requested to inspect seized documents for preparing a response. The appellant's request for an extension of the hearing date was denied, and they were advised to approach the Adjudicating Authority. Despite requesting an extension, the appellant did not submit a reply or attend the personal hearing scheduled for 2-3-1981. Consequently, the Collector decided the case based on available records.

During the appeal process, the appellant argued that natural justice was denied as the Collector adjudicated the case ex parte without a personal hearing or document inspection. The appellant claimed ignorance regarding the denial of their request to return documents for preparing a response. The Board noted that a crucial letter was not sent by registered post, leading to doubt about the appellant's receipt of the communication. Considering this doubt and the appellant's subsequent request for document return, the Board concluded that natural justice principles were not observed. As a result, the Board set aside the Collector's order and remanded the case for de novo adjudication, emphasizing the need to afford the appellant a full opportunity to present their defense while adhering to natural justice principles.

---