2016 (8) TMI 800 - AT - Customs

Request for supply of non-RUD before adjudication of the dispute - principles of natural justice - Held that - the request of the appellant for supply of the non-RUDs has not been considered favorably by the adjudicating authority and no reasons have been assigned for such non-acceptance. Since the appellant insisted that non-RUDs and the assessed copies of bills of entries are relevant for proper adjudication of the matter, the same cannot be denied, which will amount to gross and flagrant violation of the principles of natural justice. Commissioner (adjudicating authority) directed to provide the non-RUDs and the assessed copies of bills of entries to the appellant and thereafter to issue the notice for personal hearing to the appellant for explaining the case for the purpose of adjudication - appeal disposed off - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Denial of supply of non-RUDs and assessed copies of bills of entries for adjudication.
2. Validity of record of personal hearing as an order for filing appeal before the Tribunal.
3. Principles of natural justice regarding the right to relevant documents for proper adjudication.

Analysis:
1. The appellant was aggrieved by the denial of non-RUDs and assessed copies of bills of entries necessary for responding to a show cause notice. The appellant argued that the absence of these documents would render the adjudication process meaningless, violating principles of natural justice. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument, emphasizing that the denial of relevant documents would constitute a grave violation of natural justice. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to provide the requested documents and scheduled a personal hearing for proper adjudication.

2. The Tribunal deliberated on the issue of whether the record of personal hearing could be considered as an order for filing an appeal before the Tribunal under Section 129 A of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant's counsel cited a precedent where the Division Bench of the Bombay Tribunal entertained an appeal based on the record of personal hearing. Following this precedent, the Tribunal accepted the record of personal hearing as an order for the purpose of entertaining the appeal, ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to legal requirements.

3. In addressing the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal underscored the significance of providing essential documents such as non-RUDs and assessed copies of bills of entries for a fair and effective adjudication process. The Tribunal highlighted that denying access to these documents would impede the appellant's ability to present a meaningful reply and defend their case adequately. By allowing the appeal and directing the adjudicating authority to supply the requested documents, the Tribunal upheld the principles of natural justice and ensured a just adjudication process for the appellant.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the critical issues raised, the Tribunal's reasoning, and the ultimate decision rendered in favor of the appellant's right to essential documents for a fair adjudication process.