2020 (4) TMI 839 - AT - Customs

Principles of Natural Justice - DFIA scheme - order for assessment of Bill of Entry - benefit of N/N. 98/09-Cus. dated 11.09.2009 denied - case of appellant is that the relied upon documents along with show cause notice were not given to them and hence the impugned order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice as the relied upon documents in the show cause notice were not given to the appellants. Hence the orders of the lower authorities cannot be sustained and the matter needs to be remanded back. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Issues:
1. Denial of duty exemption benefit under notification 98/2009-Cus.
2. Imposition of duty under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.
3. Confiscation of goods under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962.
4. Imposition of penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.
5. Violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned order.

Analysis:

1. The appeal challenged the denial of duty exemption benefit claimed under notification 98/2009-Cus. The Additional Commissioner had initiated proceedings against the appellants through a show cause notice. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the Additional Commissioner, leading to the current appeal. The appellants argued that they were not provided with relied-upon documents during the adjudication process, violating principles of natural justice. The Tribunal agreed with the appellants, emphasizing that the order was passed without providing essential documents, leading to the appeal being allowed and the matter remanded back for fresh consideration.

2. The imposition of duty amounting to a specific sum under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962, was another issue in the appeal. The show cause notice also raised concerns about the confiscation of goods and the imposition of penalties. The appellants contended that they were not given copies of essential documents like shipping bills and test reports during the adjudication process. This lack of access to relied-upon documents was deemed a violation of natural justice, leading to the Tribunal remanding the matter back for a fresh assessment with the necessary documents provided to the appellants.

3. The issue of confiscation of goods under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962, was raised in the appeal. The appellants challenged the order on the grounds of not being provided with crucial documents during the adjudication process, which they argued violated principles of natural justice. The Tribunal found merit in the appellants' argument and remanded the matter back for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the importance of providing relied-upon documents for a fair adjudication process.

4. The imposition of a penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, was also contested in the appeal. The appellants raised concerns about the lack of access to essential documents during the adjudication process, claiming a violation of natural justice. The Tribunal agreed with the appellants, highlighting the importance of providing relied-upon documents for a fair assessment. Consequently, the matter was remanded back for a fresh consideration with the necessary documents provided to the appellants.

5. The overarching issue of the violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned order was a central point in the appeal. The appellants argued that they were not provided with relied-upon documents during the adjudication process, impacting their ability to present a robust defense. The Tribunal concurred with the appellants, emphasizing the fundamental importance of providing essential documents for a fair and just adjudication. As a result, the appeal was allowed, and the matter was remanded back for a fresh assessment with all necessary documents provided to the appellants.

← Previous Next →