TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 56
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se Excise Appeals challenge a common order passed by Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Mumbai ("Tribunal") partly allowing the appeals on the ground of denial of principles of natural justice and remanding the matters to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision in accordance with law. 2. Excise Appeal No. 6 of 2010 and others filed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, were admitted on the following substantial questions of law:- (i) When the assessee itself acknowledged receipt of all legible copies vide letter dated 18.09.2008, whether the plea of the Solicitors of the Respondent contained in their application dated 10.10.2008 received on 14.10.2008, without reference to the ackno....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....und in cash in their premises. Since the appeals were disposed of and the matters were remanded by the Tribunal on the ground of non-observance of principles of natural justice, we shall restrict our observations in this order to that aspect of the matter. 5. As noted above, the grounds concerning failure on the part of the Authority to comply with the principles of natural justice bear on three aspects, the first being non furnishing of relevant documents, the second, non-return of seized documents and the third, rejection of their prayer for cross examination of the persons whose statements were recorded in the course of investigation. So far as the third aspect, namely, rejection of the prayer for cross examination, is concerned, the Tr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the contentions raised in that regard by the assesses before the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal was of the view that having noticed the facts bearing on the issue of the alleged failure of the authority to make available the documents to the appellant to prepare their case in defence, it was obligatory for the Adjudicating Authority to ascertain whether the appellants were able to make out a case that the alleged failure had been exclusively on account of the negligence on the part of the Authority in that regard and whether the same had resulted in failure of justice or caused prejudice to the appellant so as to warrant interference. In particular reference to the documents, the Tribunal observed that most relevant documents, which ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e fact, however, remains that whatever be the conduct of the company and its directors, the documents, on the basis of which their duty liability was ascertained by the Department, were in fact not made available to the company and its directors while preparing and submitting their reply or defending the department's case of liability. The company and its directors had specifically raised the plea of denial of natural justice both before the Adjudicating Authority and the Tribunal. Original observations of the Adjudicating Authority regarding events in chronological order in the context of the grievance of the company and its directors about non furnishing of documents is a testimony to the raising of such plea. Before the Tribunal, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... view that even where it found an infraction of principles of natural justice, the court had to address a further question as to whether any purpose would be served in remitting the case to the authority. The Court held that natural justice cannot be applied in a straight jacket formula. The jurisprudential basis of principles of natural justice was procedural fairness, accuracy of outcome leading to general social goals, etc. Nevertheless, there may be situations where a fair hearing would make no difference, meaning that a hearing would not change the ultimate conclusion reached by the decision maker. In such case, no legal duty to supply a hearing arises. These observations have no bearing on the facts of our case. In our case, the autho....