9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (8) TMI 1330 - AT - CustomsAbsolute Confiscation - foreign currency - penalty - principles of Natural Justice - Held that - As regards this hearing notice as per the submission of the appellant, the same was received on 15/04/2006 therefore, the hearing could not be attended. Thereafter, the adjudication order was passed exparte. From this fact, it is clear that the appellant could not avail the opportunity of hearing of the case - matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority for passing a fresh denovo adjudication order - appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues: Violation of natural justice in passing the adjudication order
Detailed Analysis: 1. The adjudicating authority ordered absolute confiscation of Indian and foreign currency recovered from the appellant under specific sections of the Customs Act, 1962, along with imposing a penalty. The appellant challenged the order on the grounds of a violation of natural justice, citing inadequate opportunities for hearings. 2. The appellant, represented by Shri Jitendra Chimanlal Thakkar, contended that the adjudication order was passed in violation of natural justice as only two hearings were provided, with issues such as adjournment requests and delayed hearing notices impacting the appellant's ability to participate effectively in the proceedings. 3. The Revenue, represented by Shri M.K. Mall, supported the findings of the impugned order, emphasizing the importance of upholding the decision made by the adjudicating authority. 4. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions from both parties, acknowledged the violation of natural justice in the adjudication process. It was noted that the appellant was unable to attend the scheduled hearings due to reasons beyond their control, leading to the passing of the order ex parte. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority for a fresh denovo adjudication order, ensuring the appellant receives a fair opportunity for personal hearing. The appeal was allowed by way of remand, keeping all issues open for further consideration.
|
