2020 (4) TMI 800 - AT - Customs

Principles of natural justice - opportunity for cross-examination of Panch witnesses and DRI officers - HELD THAT - The appellant s request for cross-examination of Panch witnesses as also the officers is prima facie genuine request so as to complete the adjudication proceedings judiciously. In as much as the Panch witnesses have already been allowed cross-examination, though according to the learned advocate they have not appeared during any of the hearings so fixed for the said purpose, we deem it fit to direct the Adjudicating Authority to ensure the appearance of Panch witnesses during the next date of hearing to be fixed by him. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to communication of Commissioner of Customs regarding cross-examination of Panch witnesses and DRI officers.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD concerned a communication from the Commissioner of Customs regarding the appellant's request for cross-examination of Panch witnesses and DRI officers. The Commissioner allowed cross-examination of the Panch witnesses but rejected the request for cross-examination of the DRI officers who seized 33 kgs of gold biscuits from the appellant. The appellant challenged this denial of cross-examination of DRI officers in the Hon'ble High Court of Lucknow through a writ petition, which directed the appellant to approach the Tribunal for addressing this issue.

The appellant contended that there were reasons to believe and evidence to show that the Panchas listed in the Panchnama were not residing at the documented location. The appellant argued that the Panchas were not called from the interception area, which was a serious flaw requiring an opportunity to prove this discrepancy through cross-examination of both the Panch witnesses and the DRI officers.

After considering the submissions, the Tribunal found the appellant's request for cross-examination of the Panch witnesses and officers to be prima facie genuine for completing the adjudication proceedings judiciously. While the Panch witnesses were already allowed cross-examination, the Tribunal directed the Adjudicating Authority to ensure their appearance at the next hearing. If the appellant still deemed it necessary to cross-examine the DRI officers after examining the Panch witnesses, they were permitted to make a request to the Adjudicating Authority for consideration.

Consequently, the appeal was disposed of with the direction for the appearance of Panch witnesses and the option for the appellant to request cross-examination of DRI officers if deemed necessary. The Miscellaneous Application was also disposed of in accordance with the Tribunal's decision.