1 cexa-11.05 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 11 OF 2006 Mrs.Shalaka V. Rane. ... Appellant. V/s. The Commissioner of Customs & others. ... Respondents. N.R.Gandhi for the appellant. R.B.Pardeshi for the respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND R.M.SAVANT, JJ. DATED : 31st August 2010. P.C. : Perused appeal. Heard learned counsel for the rival parties. 2. This appeal was admitted vide order dated 6th March, 2006 to consider the following substantial question of law: “Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, penalty could be imposed on the Director of a Company over and above the personal penalty imposed on the Company under Section 140 of the Customs Act, 1962? 2 cexa-11.05 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the record and proceedings available on record, this Court finds that the present appellant was neither represented by any advocate nor she presented her own case before the Adjudicating Authority or the Appellate Tribunal. Number of grounds were raised in the appeal filed before the Tribunal. All the grounds raised in the appeal memo are not dealt with by the Tribunal. The order is, prima facie; in breach of principles of natural justice. 4. Mr.Pardeshi, learned counsel for the respondent- Revenue fairly states that in order to afford proper and adequate opportunity of hearing to the appellant- assessee, in the interest of justice, without examining the merits or demerits of the impugned orders passed by the authorities below, the order impugned herein as well as the order passed by the adjudicating authority be set aside and the proceedings be restored to the file of the adjudicating authority for consideration afresh with direction to decide it by a reasoned order following principles of natural justice. 4. In the above view of the matter, looking to the consensus between the parties, impugned order as well as the order passed by the adjudicating authority are set aside. Proceedings are remitted back to the adjudicating authority for consideration afresh following principles of natural justice. The appellant undertakes to appear before the adjudicating authority on 20th September, 2010. The 3 cexa-11.05 adjudicating authority would be free to hear the appellant on the date when she appears or any other date suitable to the adjudicating authority. 5. In view of this order question of law does not survive. Appeal stands disposed of in terms of this order with no order as to costs. (R.M.SAVANT, J.) (V.C.DAGA J.)