Natural justice breach allows remand for fresh adjudication, and an appeal fails where no legal prejudice is shown.

An adjudication made without granting personal hearing was held to violate natural justice, and the lower appellate authority was competent to annul the order-in-original and remand the matter for fresh adjudication. The remand left the dispute open for reconsideration on merits, so the Revenue suffered no legal prejudice and had no maintainable grievance against the appellate order. The departmental appeal was therefore rejected, and the cross-objection disposed of. The principle applied was that an order passed in breach of natural justice may be set aside and remitted for de novo decision, and a party cannot challenge an order that is beneficial to it and does not cause legal injury.

---

---

Issues: Whether the lower appellate authority was justified in annulling the order-in-original for violation of natural justice and remanding the matter for fresh adjudication, and whether the Revenue could maintain an appeal against such an order.

Analysis: The order-in-original had been passed without granting personal hearing, resulting in violation of the principles of natural justice. The lower appellate authority was competent to annul such an order and direct a fresh decision by the adjudicating authority. The remand did not prejudice the Revenue; on the contrary, it left the matter open for reconsideration on merits.

Conclusion: The Revenue had no grievance against the order and the appeal was not maintainable on that basis. The departmental appeal was rejected, and the cross-objection was disposed of.

Final Conclusion: The appellate order annulling the original adjudication and remitting the matter for fresh consideration was sustained, leaving the dispute to be re-decided after complying with natural justice.

Ratio Decidendi: An order passed in breach of natural justice may be annulled and remitted for de novo adjudication, and a party cannot successfully challenge an order that is beneficial to it and does not cause legal prejudice.

---