ATUL ENGINEERING UDYOG Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Counsel points out that learned Commissioner (Appeals) has pre -judged the issue to agree with the learned Adjudicating Authority which is coming out from page 6 of the adjudication order which can be compared with the descriptions made in the discussion and finding of both orders. He brought out resemblance in the language employed by both the authorities. Such a submission is sufficient enough to send back the matter, expecting the Appellate Authority to decide the matter afresh without a mechanical decision concurring with the learned Adjudicating Authority. When we notice that there is a bias of above nature, we do not consider it proper to keep the matter pending here. Therefore, we dispense the pre -deposit and dispose the appeal sending the matter back to learned Appellate Authority below to pass a reasoned and speaking order depicting the matter in controversy, submissions of the Appellant, evidence recorded, reasons of decisions and decision to show that his order not only rendered justice but seemed to have been done.

(2.) Thus, both stay application and appeal is disposed.