1999 (11) TMI 453

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the Appellant. Shri Deepak Kumar, SDR, for the Respondents. [Order per: J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. - Against the order of the Asstt. Commissioner confirming the demand of Rs. 2,08,095/- and imposing penalty of Rs. 25,000/-, the applicants filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner on hearing the applicants passed an order on 31-12-98 directing them to make p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r's order and by their not doing so, their appeal was capable of being dismissed in terms of Sec. 35F. The only lacunae in the order in dismissing the appeal was that the ld. Commissioner omitted to invite the appellant before him for hearing. A similar issue had come up before the Karnataka High Court in the case of M.I. Metal Sections Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore [1995 (75) E.L.T. 470 (Kar.)]. Th....