https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182027 The Division Bench allowed the appeal, directing the review applicants to refund the amount within two weeks, citing Article 265 of the Constitution. The Commissioner sought a review, arguing lack of opportunity for the review applicants to present their case. The Court found the grievance justified due to procedural irregularity, allowing the review application, recalling the order, and reopening the writ appeal for a fresh hearing. The judgment stressed the importance of providing adequate opportunity for all parties to present their case before a decision is made, in line with legal precedents. en-us Mon, 28 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Apr 2016 11:23:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182027 The Division Bench allowed the appeal, directing the review applicants to refund the amount within two weeks, citing Article 265 of the Constitution. The Commissioner sought a review, arguing lack of opportunity for the review applicants to present their case. The Court found the grievance justified due to procedural irregularity, allowing the review application, recalling the order, and reopening the writ appeal for a fresh hearing. The judgment stressed the importance of providing adequate opportunity for all parties to present their case before a decision is made, in line with legal precedents. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 28 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182027