https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44924 A stay application under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act could not be dismissed for non-appearance where the hearing was fixed by telegram at a different place and attendance was impracticable. The authority was required to act fairly, comply with earlier directions to decide the application within time, and observe natural justice in quasi-judicial disposal. The impugned dismissal was therefore unsustainable. The order was quashed and the stay application was restored for fresh hearing and decision in accordance with law and natural justice. en-us Thu, 02 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Jul 2010 10:47:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44924 A stay application under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act could not be dismissed for non-appearance where the hearing was fixed by telegram at a different place and attendance was impracticable. The authority was required to act fairly, comply with earlier directions to decide the application within time, and observe natural justice in quasi-judicial disposal. The impugned dismissal was therefore unsustainable. The order was quashed and the stay application was restored for fresh hearing and decision in accordance with law and natural justice. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 02 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44924