9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (12) TMI 648 - AT - CustomsPrinciples of Natural Justice - request of appellant for cross-examination of witnesses has been rejected during the adjudication proceedings - HELD THAT - The identical case has been investigated and identical Show Cause Notice was issued in the case of KUDRAT CORPORATION VERSUS C.C. -AHMEDABAD 2020 (7) TMI 705 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD . In the said case also, the appellant had approached the Tribunal against the order rejecting cross examination of the same witnesses i.e. Shri Ashok Prasad, Assistant Professor, NIFT Delhi and Shri Bipin Kumar, Assistant Professor, IIT, Delhi who have given the expert technical opinion which were relied upon in the show cause notice and this Tribunal has allowed the cross examination. Since the same issue particularly, cross-examination of the same persons was involved, the above decision is directly applicable in the appellant s case - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues involved:
- Rejection of request for cross-examination of witnesses during adjudication proceedings. Detailed Analysis: 1. The appeals were filed against an order by the Principal Commissioner rejecting the appellant's request for cross-examination of witnesses during the adjudication proceedings in a specific show cause notice. 2. The appellant's counsel highlighted a previous case where the Tribunal allowed cross-examination of the same witnesses, emphasizing the inconsistency in decisions. 3. The Revenue's representative relied on various judgments to support the rejection of cross-examination, citing precedents related to similar cases. 4. The Tribunal noted that in a previous case involving the same witnesses, cross-examination was allowed, indicating a lack of consistency in decisions. 5. The Adjudicating Authority provided reasoning for rejecting the cross-examination request, citing that no new facts were likely to emerge and it would only delay the proceedings. 6. The Tribunal disagreed with the Adjudicating Authority's reasoning, emphasizing that cross-examination is crucial for the principles of natural justice and that the appellant should be allowed to cross-examine witnesses except the SIO. 7. The Tribunal referenced Section 138B of the Customs Act, stating that statements made by individuals before a Custom Officer can be admitted as evidence when the person is examined as a witness, emphasizing the importance of cross-examination for admitting evidence. 8. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant should be allowed to cross-examine witnesses, except the SIO, as requested, based on principles of natural justice and the importance of cross-examination in the adjudication process. 9. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the adjudicating authority to grant cross-examination of witnesses as requested by the appellant, following the principles of natural justice and consistency in decisions. 10. The Tribunal clarified that cross-examination of specific witnesses, Shri Ashok Prasad and Shri Bipin Kumar, should be allowed, while noting that cross-examination of the SIO was not necessary as per the appellant's counsel's decision. 11. The appeal was allowed based on the above terms, ensuring that cross-examination of relevant witnesses was granted, maintaining fairness and adherence to legal procedures.
|
