TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court emphasizes fair hearing by setting aside tribunal's judgment for improper adjournment rejection.</h1> <h3>TRIMURTI FRAGRANCE PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KANPUR</h3> The High Court set aside the tribunal's judgment due to improper rejection of the adjournment application without considering the grounds' genuineness. ... Appeal - Hearing - Adjournment application Issues:1. Rejection of adjournment application by the tribunal without considering the genuineness of the grounds.2. Denial of opportunity of hearing to the appellant by the tribunal.3. Justification of the tribunal's actions in passing the impugned judgment without proper consideration.4. Setting aside the impugned judgment and remitting the matter for fresh consideration.Analysis:1. The High Court addressed the issue of the tribunal rejecting the adjournment application without assessing the genuineness of the grounds presented. The court emphasized that the tribunal's approach of rejecting adjournments based on past instances was improper, as each adjournment application should be evaluated on its own merit. The court highlighted that the tribunal failed to consider the medical certificate supporting the adjournment application, leading to a denial of the appellant's right to a fair hearing.2. The court further delved into the denial of opportunity of hearing to the appellant by the tribunal. It noted that the tribunal proceeded to hear the appeal on its merits without being satisfied with the explanation provided in the adjournment application. This action was deemed as a violation of the appellant's right to present their case effectively, as the tribunal did not adequately consider the grounds for adjournment.3. The High Court examined the justification of the tribunal's actions in passing the impugned judgment without proper consideration. It cited a Supreme Court judgment emphasizing that the reasonableness of an adjournment request should be evaluated based on the current circumstances, without undue emphasis on past adjournments. The court found the tribunal's decision to reject the adjournment application on extraneous grounds as improper and not in accordance with the law.4. Finally, the High Court concluded by setting aside the impugned judgment and remitting the matter for fresh consideration. The court directed the concerned authority to decide the case afresh after providing an opportunity for both parties to be heard. The court stressed the importance of a fair hearing and expeditious resolution of the matter, ensuring that the appellant's rights are upheld in the process.In summary, the High Court's judgment focused on upholding the principles of natural justice, fair hearing, and proper consideration of adjournment applications in legal proceedings, ultimately leading to the setting aside of the impugned judgment and a directive for a fresh consideration of the case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
