- (1.) By this appeal, challenge is made to the order dated 6-11-2015 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal').
(2.) Learned counsel submits that by playing fraud by the assessee, registration of new unit was sought while earlier registration was granted for two other units. After knowing about the fraud committed by the respondent assessee, a letter was issued on 27-11-2013 as Annexure-1 for revocation of the registration of Central Excise dated 6-9-2013. It was challenged by the non-appellant. The Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur has allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order revoking registration. The appeal filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal has been dismissed in ignorance of the fact that the respondent assessee was not entitled to get common registration for Manglam Cement Limited. The authorities thus revoked the order of registration granted earlier to the assessee.
(3.) It is stated that learned Tribunal refused to interfere in the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that an opportunity of hearing was not given to the assessee before passing the order of revocation of common registration. The aforesaid was in ignorance of the fact that on an application submitted by the assessee prior to revocation of common registration, assessee was called for hearing. In view of above, order of the Tribunal needs interference as opportunity of hearing was given though prior to the letter dated 27-11-2013. It is more so when prior to approaching the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee had approached this Court by maintaining a writ petition. An interim order was passed therein but it was due to suppression of certain facts from the Court. The writ petition was, however, dismissed as withdrawn. It was subsequent to favourable order by the Commissioner (Appeals).;