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>Court overturns Order-in-Appeal due to lack of natural justice principles.</h1> <h3>IN RE: SATWIK DRUGS LTD.</h3> IN RE: SATWIK DRUGS LTD. - 2000 (115) E.L.T. 853 (G. O. I.) Issues:1. Rejection of rebate claims under Section 11B of the CEA, 1944.2. Alleged violation of principles of natural justice.3. Observance of natural justice in adjudication process.Analysis:The case involves four Revision Applications filed against an Order-in-Appeal rejecting rebate claims totaling Rs. 2,91,565 under Section 11B of the CEA, 1944. The applicants contended that there was a violation of natural justice principles as the matter was not decided on merits, seeking a remand. The Divisional Asst. Commissioner sought clarifications from the applicants, who promptly replied within the stipulated time frame. However, the orders were passed without considering their responses or granting a personal hearing, leading to allegations of haste and disregard for settled legal principles.The judgment emphasized the importance of natural justice, stating that the mere recording of its observance is insufficient; the order must reflect its application. It highlighted that noticees must be informed of the charges against them, given a reasonable opportunity to defend, and granted a personal hearing when requested. The failure to consider the applicants' replies and provide a personal hearing indicated a lack of adherence to these principles, leading to the decision being set aside in the interest of justice.In the interest of justice and to ensure compliance with natural justice principles, the Government remanded the cases to the original authority for a fresh decision. The Order-in-Appeal and the original orders of the Asstt. Commissioner were set aside, emphasizing that no decision was made on the merits of the case. The judgment underscored the need for adjudicating authorities to follow established legal principles and provide a fair opportunity for parties to present their case before reaching a decision.
TaxTMI 