Court sets aside Customs Tribunal order due to reliance on withdrawn circular, directs reconsideration. Petition disposed, no interference.

The Court set aside the impugned order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal solely due to reliance on a withdrawn circular dated August 7, 2001. The Court directed the Tribunal to reconsider the circular's application and consider judgments favored by the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed of, with the Court declining to interfere with other aspects of the order, deeming the respondents to have denied the allegations.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Challenge to impugned order based on violation of principles of natural justice due to reliance on withdrawn circular; Non-consideration of judgment by Co-ordinate Bench in favor of petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the impugned order dated February 25, 2020, passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, alleging a violation of natural justice principles. The Tribunal had relied on a circular dated August 7, 2001, which had been withdrawn from the financial year 2002-03. The petitioner contended that the Tribunal did not consider a judgment by another Co-ordinate Bench favoring the petitioner. The respondents' advocate acknowledged the consideration of the Co-ordinate Bench judgment but did not contest the reliance on the withdrawn circular.

Upon hearing both parties, the Court determined that maintaining the writ petition would be futile and decided to set aside the impugned order solely on the issue of the withdrawn circular dated August 7, 2001. The Court directed the Tribunal to reconsider the application of the circular in the petitioner's case and to also take into account the judgments the petitioner wishes to rely on during the rehearing.

Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition by setting aside the impugned order on the specific ground of the withdrawn circular, while declining to interfere with the remaining aspects of the order. The Court clarified that the allegations in the writ petition were deemed to have been denied by the respondents. The writ petition was disposed of at the motion stage, concluding the matter.

---