MOONLIGHT AUTO LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant's precise grievance is that the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') has allowed the appeal filed by the revenue without considering or adverting to his written arguments, which were filed on 16 -8 -2011, a day before the appeal was decided. Counsel for the appellant submits that an earlier order, dated 25 -2 -2008, passed by the Tribunal, was set aside by this Court, by directing the Tribunal to pass a speaking order. The petitioner, thereafter, filed written arguments, which were received in the office of Tribunal, on 16 -8 -2011. The appellant made a specific plea in the last paragraph of the written arguments that the appeal may be decided on the basis of written submissions without his personal presence. The Tribunal has not considered the written submissions and has instead decided the appeal by recording that the appellant is not cooperating with the Tribunal.

(2.) WRITTEN statement filed on behalf of respondent No. 1, in Court today, is taken on record.

(3.) WE have heard counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.