9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .P.s : Mr.Raghavan Ramabadran For the Respondents in both W.P.s : Mrs.Hema Muralikrishnan Senior Standing Counsel COMMON ORDER Both these writ petitions are filed challenging the orders in original Nos.39/2019 and 13/2019 dated 31.03.2019 and 20.02.2019 respectively, passed by the second respondent. 2. In W.P.No.27931 of 2019, the order impugned has partly rejected the refund claim made by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel for the petitioner submitted that these writ petitions are maintainable before this Court, since the impugned orders were passed in violation of principles of natural justice. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the second respondent, before passing the impugned orders, did not issue any show cause notice or provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e impugned orders. Therefore, she submitted that the authority has considered the merits of the claim made by the petitioner and rightly passed the impugned orders. However, on the question of providing an opportunity of personal hearing, as raised by the petitioner herein, the learned Senior Standing counsel fairly submitted that no such opportunity was granted in this case. Therefore, she fair ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the refund claim either in part or whole, he should put the petitioner on notice and seek for explanation and decide the matter thereafter on providing an opportunity of personal hearing as well. The above view is supported by the decision rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court reported in 2018 (360) E.L.T. 234. I myself considered the scope of affording an opportunity of personal he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
