Right to effective hearing and additional evidence secured remand for fresh appellate consideration after inadequate representation.

The Tribunal found that the assessee had not been given an effective opportunity of hearing before the first appellate authority because the authorised representative had appeared only to seek adjournment and had not argued the merits. In the absence of rebuttal, the explanation of lack of due hearing was accepted. As the assessee also sought admission of additional evidence relevant to adjudication, the matter was restored to the first appellate authority for fresh consideration, admission of the evidence, and a decision after granting adequate opportunity of hearing. The assessee succeeded for statistical purposes.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was denied proper opportunity of hearing before the first appellate authority and, if so, whether the matter should be restored for consideration of additional evidence.

Analysis: The record showed that the authorised representative named in the appellate order did not effectively represent the assessee on merits and had appeared only for seeking adjournment. In the absence of rebuttal, the Tribunal accepted the explanation that the appeal had been decided without due and effective opportunity. Since the assessee also sought admission of additional evidence necessary for adjudication, the ends of justice required restoration of the matter to the first appellate authority for fresh decision after considering the evidence and affording adequate hearing.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded to the first appellate authority to admit the additional evidence, provide proper opportunity of hearing, and decide the dispute afresh; the assessee succeeded for statistical purposes.

---