MESSRS BLOOM DEKOR LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have challenged an order dated 19-2-2018 passed by CESTAT in the following circumstances [2018 (364) E.L.T. 894 (Tribunal)].

(2.) The petitioner had preferred appeal before the Tribunal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) dated 5-5-2015. There was delay of 425 days in filing such appeal. Separate application for condonation of delay was also filed. According to the petitioners, Tribunal had fixed the date of hearing of such application. On the date so fixed, hearing took place only with respect to the question of condonation of delay. The Tribunal however disposed of the appeal on merits rejecting the same. The petitioners have therefore, pressed the ground of serious breach of principles of natural justice. The respondents have appeared and are represented by their counsel.

(3.) We do not have any reason to discard the petitioners' averments on oath. It would therefore, emerge that the Tribunal by the impugned judgment decided the appeal of the petitioners on merits when only hearing that took place was with respect to the application for condonation of delay. Without condoning delay, it was not open for the Tribunal to dispose of the appeal on merits. It was possible for the Tribunal to hear both the proceedings simultaneously and after condoning delay, decide the appeal on merits. However, it was not so done in the present case.