2018 (10) TMI 171 - AT - Customs

Re-classification of goods - goods declared as rough marbles reclassifiable as rough lime stone blocks - revaluation - denial of cross-examination - principles of natural justice - Held that - It is seen that appellant had sought cross-examination of the author of the report of the Geological Survey of India which was denied. Compounding the denial, the adjudicating authority, instead of either accepting or rejecting the said request, placed reliance on the record of cross-examination incorporated in the erstwhile order dated 15th March 2002. Furthermore, it is seen that the adjudicating authority has also placed reliance on the analysis in the erstwhile order which was endorsed, without any independent evaluation thereof, in the impugned orders to determine the market price for the computation of redemption fine. These two aspects in the impugned order are contrary to the principles of natural justice and are also in total disregard of the remand order of the Tribunal which directed a fresh decision. A decision is not merely the operative part of the order but should include findings of the adjudicating authority. It was improper on the part of the adjudicating authority to rely upon an order which has been set aside and, therefore, non-existent. Matter remanded back to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision to be based on independent findings and with strict compliance to the order passed on the earlier occasion by the Tribunal - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Appeals against orders-in-original for re-classification and re-valuation of imported goods; denial of cross-examination; reliance on previous orders; violation of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The appeals were filed against orders-in-original related to the import of goods declared as 'rough marbles' but were sought to be re-classified as 'rough lime stone blocks' under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Geological Survey of India and M/s Geochem Laboratories Limited conducted tests leading to proceedings for re-classification and re-valuation. The goods were confiscated with an option for redemption on payment of fine and imposition of penalty. The Tribunal remanded the matter for fresh decision, emphasizing the importance of providing the entire test report to the importers and granting a personal hearing. This decision was based on the lack of evidence to refute the importers' claims of not receiving crucial documents.

In a subsequent appeal regarding other bill entries, the Tribunal again set aside the adjudicating authority's order due to the failure to establish the service of hearing notices upon the appellants, thus violating principles of natural justice. The Tribunal directed a fresh decision by the jurisdictional Commissioner after ensuring a proper hearing for the appellants.

During the hearing, it was noted that the appellant's request for cross-examination of the author of the Geological Survey of India report was denied by the adjudicating authority. Instead of addressing this denial, the authority relied on previous orders, including analysis and findings, which were not independently evaluated. This reliance on past orders, without conducting a fresh assessment as directed by the Tribunal, was deemed a violation of natural justice principles. The Tribunal emphasized that a decision should include independent findings and be based on the current case, not on previously set-aside orders. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision within six months, ensuring strict compliance with the Tribunal's previous order.