9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Mis-declaration of quantity and value of imported goods, violation of principles of natural justice, waiver of show cause notice, imposition of penalties without full opportunity to defend.
The main issue in the appeals was the mis-declaration of the quantity and value of imported goods by the appellants, leading to the confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties. The appellant argued that the goods were as declared and that they were not provided with test reports of samples taken by the Revenue authorities, violating their right to be heard. The Revenue authorities contended that the appellants had waived the issuance of show cause notice, implying acceptance of mis-declaration. The Tribunal noted that the impugned order was hastily issued without following principles of natural justice, emphasizing the seriousness of the charge. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the matter for retesting the goods, providing the CRCL report to the appellant, and ensuring a fair hearing before deciding the case. The goods were to be released provisionally following the prescribed procedure. Regarding the waiver of show cause notice, the Tribunal distinguished the case from a precedent cited by the Revenue, emphasizing that the appellant had only waived notice regarding the duty amount, not penalties and fines. The Tribunal found that the appellant was penalized without a full opportunity to defend, as no personal hearing was granted by the adjudicating authority. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the Supreme Court's ratio was not applicable in this scenario, leading to the decision to remand the case for upholding the law and providing the appellant with a fair opportunity to defend themselves fully. In a separate assent, another member of the Tribunal concurred with the order passed by the primary judge, highlighting the discrepancy between the Supreme Court judgment cited by the Revenue and the facts of the present case. The member agreed that the appellant had not been provided with a complete opportunity to defend against the penalties imposed, necessitating the remand of the case for proper adjudication in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The appeals were allowed by way of remand, ensuring a fair process for the appellant.
|
