9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (4) TMI 14 - HC - CustomsOpportunity for cross-examination - Held that - taking into consideration the earlier order passed by this court, the writ petition is allowed, and the impugned order is quashed and the respondent is directed to afford an opportunity of personal hearing, during which the petitioners can make a request to the respondent to provide an opportunity to cross-examine Mr. J. Thiyagarajan and G. Venkatesh of M/s. Surana Corporation, who are infact petitioners in the earlier writ petition, in the event, the respondent proposes to rely upon the statement recorded by them during the adjudication of SCN - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner.
Issues: Challenge to rejection of cross-examination request in adjudication proceedings.
In this judgment by the Madras High Court, the petitioner challenged an order dated 7-7-2015 where their request for cross-examination was denied in adjudication proceedings following a show cause notice dated 5-11-2014. The show cause notice involved seven noticees, with the petitioners being Noticees No. 7 & 2. Previously, three other noticees had filed writ petitions challenging a similar order rejecting cross-examination permission, and the court directed them to reply to the show cause notice and granted an opportunity for personal hearing. The petitioners submitted their reply on 2-6-2015, requesting an opportunity for cross-examination. Considering the facts and the previous court order, the High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order, and directed the respondent to provide a personal hearing where the petitioners can request to cross-examine specific individuals from M/s. Surana Corporation. These individuals were petitioners in the earlier writ petition. The court emphasized that if the respondent intends to rely on statements made by these individuals during the adjudication, the petitioners must be given the chance to cross-examine them. The High Court allowed the writ petitions with the specified directions and closed the connected miscellaneous petitions without imposing any costs on the parties involved.
|
