Court affirms dismissal of writ petition challenging Tribunal's decision on evasive conduct.

The High Court upheld the order of the learned Single Judge who dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant against the Appellate Tribunal's decision. The Tribunal found the petitioner's conduct evasive towards show cause notices, resulting in an ex parte order. Despite claims of lack of hearing and cross-examination of co-noticees, the Court affirmed the decision, citing the appellant's persistent avoidance of notices. The appeal was dismissed, and the Civil Application was disposed of accordingly.

---

---

Issues:
1. Validity of the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
2. Conduct of the petitioner in response to show cause notices.
3. Opportunity of hearing and cross-examination of co-noticees.

Analysis:
1. The High Court found no infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge, who dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant against the order dated 29-8-2007 passed by the Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 19 of 2000. The Single Judge considered the submissions and decisions cited by the appellant's counsel before making the decision.

2. The affidavit filed by the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, revealed that the petitioner had been issued multiple show cause notices between 1988 and 1999. The Tribunal concluded that the petitioner's conduct indicated avoidance of notices, leading to an ex parte order on 29-8-2007. The Tribunal directed the petitioner to deposit the penalty amount within 45 days, and the appeal was scheduled for compliance assessment on 12-3-2008. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the petitioner's default as the reason for the ex parte order.

3. The appellant's counsel argued that the appellant was not granted an opportunity for a hearing and cross-examination of co-noticees. However, the High Court ruled that since the appellant had been avoiding notices and not appearing before the forum, the question of allowing cross-examination did not arise. The Court supported the decision of the learned Single Judge in not entertaining the writ petition, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal and the disposal of the Civil Application.

---