High Court sets aside order lacking consideration, emphasizes need for thorough assessment of submissions. Adjournment discretion upheld, remitted for fresh consideration.

The High Court set aside the impugned order due to lack of proper consideration of crucial contentions, breaching natural justice. The Court emphasized the need for the Tribunal to assess written submissions thoroughly. The Tribunal's decision not to grant adjournment or transfer the case was within its discretion but required addressing parties' contentions. The matter was remitted back to the Tribunal for a fresh consideration, keeping all rival contentions open, without awarding costs.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against the order allowing Revenue's appeal and rejecting respondent's cross-objection.

Analysis:
The High Court analyzed the impugned order, finding it cryptic and unreasoned. The Court noted that the Tribunal did not consider the three contentions raised by the respondent, which were crucial to the case. The Court emphasized that the Tribunal should have considered and appreciated the written submissions filed on record, as they were not dismissible without proper scrutiny. The Court held that the impugned order lacked an application of mind and consideration of the contentions, leading to a breach of natural justice and rendering it bad in law.

The Court further observed that the Tribunal's refusal to grant adjournment or transfer the case to the Division Bench was within its discretion. However, the Tribunal was obligated to give due consideration to the written submissions and address the contentions raised by the parties. Since the impugned order failed to meet this standard, the Court set it aside and remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for a fresh consideration on its own merits, with all rival contentions to be kept open. No costs were awarded in this decision.

---