2011 (6) TMI 533 - AT - Customs

Natural justice Held that - appellant did not participate during investigation is not a valid reason for not sending show-cause notice and enclosures to the party. If the appellant is an established importer, the show-cause notice could have been served before adjudicating the matter. At any rate, the adjudication order, without serving show-cause notice and relied upon documents, cannot be sustained, Order-in-Original is issued without complying with natural justice, requirement of pre-deposit waived, matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority, stay application and appeal are disposed of

Summary

Issues involved:
Violation of principles of natural justice in not serving show-cause notice and relied upon documents; Allegation of evasion of customs duty by mis-declaration of country of origin; Allegation against the appellant for being the actual person behind the import; Request for deferment of personal hearing and non-compliance by the department; Waiver of pre-deposit due to Order-in-Original issued without natural justice; Remand of the matter to adjudicating authority for serving show-cause notice and documents.

Analysis:
The main issue in this case revolves around the violation of principles of natural justice as the show-cause notice and relied upon documents were not served on the appellant. The appellant contended that he was never served the required documents and that the department failed to comply with the principles of natural justice. Despite the appellant's request for the show-cause notice and documents, the department did not provide them, leading to a lack of opportunity for the appellant to defend himself adequately.

Another significant issue is the allegation of evasion of customs duty by mis-declaring the country of origin of the imported goods. The main importer had imported goods from China but declared them as originating from Korea to avoid anti-dumping duty. This led to a case against the importer for customs duty evasion. The appellant, who introduced the importer to the Customs House Agent (CHA) handling the import documents, was suspected by the revenue authority to be the actual person behind the import.

The appellant's non-appearance before the customs authority despite summons raised suspicions about his involvement in the import. The revenue department filed a criminal complaint against the appellant for non-compliance with the summons issued to him. The appellant argued that he was an established importer and should have been served the show-cause notice before adjudication. The department's failure to issue the notice and relied upon documents was considered a violation of natural justice by the Tribunal.

Due to the Order-in-Original being issued without complying with natural justice, the requirement of pre-deposit was waived, and the appeal was taken up for hearing. The Tribunal concluded that the matter needed to be remanded back to the adjudicating authority for serving the show-cause notice and relied upon documents to the appellant. The impugned order was set aside, and the case was remanded to ensure compliance with the principles of natural justice.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found that the appellant's rights to natural justice were violated, leading to the decision to remand the matter back to the adjudicating authority for a fair adjudication process. The appeal and stay application were both disposed of accordingly, emphasizing the importance of upholding procedural fairness and principles of natural justice in legal proceedings.