9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Alleged under-valuation of imported goods. 2. Admissibility and evidentiary value of reports dated 14-5-1993 and 8-6-1993. 3. Compliance with remand order and principles of natural justice. Alleged Under-valuation of Imported Goods: The Revenue filed appeals against the Adjudication Order confiscating goods imported by two appellants in 1992, alleging under-valuation. The Commissioner's order stated the under-valuation charge was not proven for clock quartz movements but upheld confiscation for PCBs. The Revenue argued the Commissioner failed to comply with the remand order and disregarded Tribunal's findings on the admissibility of reports from Hong Kong Customs. The Revenue invoked a Supreme Court decision to support the obligation to consider such documents. They highlighted the absence of evidence from DRI and lack of notice for hearing, urging a remand for fresh adjudication. Admissibility and Evidentiary Value of Reports: The Advocate for the Respondent contended that primary materials supporting the reports were crucial for rebuttal but were not disclosed. Referring to past Tribunal decisions, it was argued that the reports were not utilized during the original proceedings and lacked conclusive evidentiary value. The Advocate pointed out that the Supreme Court had dismissed Revenue's appeals related to the documents, indicating a lack of challenge to their evidentiary value. The Tribunal had previously considered the importance of primary material and the limited utility of the reports, emphasizing the need for disclosure for a fair challenge. Compliance with Remand Order and Principles of Natural Justice: After considering arguments from both sides, the Tribunal noted the earlier opinion that the reports held evidentiary value and required consideration for adjudication. Referring to principles of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to remand the case for de novo consideration by the Adjudicating Authority, emphasizing the importance of including the reports in the process. The Tribunal highlighted the need for DRI to present the documents, ensuring a fair opportunity for all parties and adherence to natural justice. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the existing order and allowed the appeals by remanding the case for further adjudication.
|
