Tribunal overturns ex parte orders, emphasizes right to access documents for fair defense. Manufacturer granted opportunity for inspection.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the ex parte orders due to the failure to reply to notices and attend hearings by the concerned parties. The appellant, a manufacturer facing duty evasion allegations, highlighted the lack of supply of essential documents as a violation of natural justice principles. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing access to relied-upon documents for a fair defense, granting the appellant an opportunity to inspect and copy documents and file replies within a specified timeline. The Commissioner was directed to schedule a hearing considering the appellant's commitment not to seek unnecessary adjournments.

---

---

Issues:
1. Failure to reply to notices and attend hearings leading to ex parte orders.
2. Allegations of duty evasion, penalties, and interest on finished goods.
3. Lack of supply of relied-upon documents and violation of natural justice principles.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the appellant, a manufacturer of polyethylene woven fabrics and sacks, facing allegations of stock shortage as per RG 1 register, leading to seizure of documents and issuance of notices demanding duty, penalties, and interest. Despite receiving notices in February 1999, none of the concerned parties replied or attended hearings scheduled over 10 months, resulting in ex parte orders by the Commissioner.

2. The appellant argued that being declared a sick industrial undertaking should be considered, and highlighted the non-supply of relied-upon documents as a key issue. The Tribunal noted that while ample opportunities were given, the failure to reply or attend hearings indicated a lack of serious contestation. However, the non-supply of essential documents was a crucial violation of natural justice principles.

3. The panchnama revealed seized documents like RG 1 registers and invoices, yet the show cause notice did not enclose copies of these crucial documents. The appellant's counsel emphasized the lack of document supply prior to the notice issuance, hindering their ability to respond effectively. The Tribunal accepted this argument, emphasizing the importance of providing access to relied-upon documents for a fair defense.

4. In light of the above, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order. The appellant was granted a period to inspect and copy documents, followed by the filing of replies within a specified timeline. The Commissioner was instructed to schedule a hearing after the appellant's inspection and replies, with a directive to consider the appellant's counsel's commitment not to seek unnecessary adjournments.

---