2022 (2) TMI 371 - HC - Customs

Violation of principle of natural justice - effective opportunity of personal hearing not provided to the petitioner in spite of request for personal hearing - no opportunity was given to the petitioner to cross-examine the person concerned - no legible copies of some of the documents upon which respondent concerned wanted to rely, were provided to the petitioner in spite of its request - HELD THAT - There is a gross violation of principle of natural justice in the case of the petitioner in course of impugned adjudication proceedings and at the time of passing the impugned adjudication order and keeping this writ petition pending and calling for affidavit from the respondents will be a futile exercise and this writ petition is disposed off by setting aside the impugned adjudication order dated 21 st September, 2021 being Annexure P-9 to the writ petition on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice alone. Matter remanded back to the officer concerned to reconsider the case of the petitioner and pass a fresh adjudication order after giving effective opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorised representative after supplying the eligible copies of the relevant documents upon which the respondent concerned wants to rely and also shall allow the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses upon whose statement the respondent concerned wants to rely in the impugned adjudication proceedings - petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Violation of principle of natural justice in impugned adjudication proceedings.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged an adjudication order passed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs, alleging a gross violation of the principle of natural justice. The petitioner claimed that no effective opportunity for personal hearing was provided, despite a request, and no chance for cross-examination of relevant witnesses was given. The petitioner also highlighted the lack of legible copies of certain documents necessary for the proceedings. The respondent's advocate did not contest these allegations, acknowledging their substantiation by the documents attached to the writ petition.

The Court, after considering the submissions and documents, found merit in the petitioner's claim of a violation of natural justice principles during the adjudication process. The Court decided to set aside the impugned adjudication order solely on the grounds of this violation. The matter was remanded back to the officer concerned for reconsideration, with specific directions to provide the petitioner with an effective opportunity for a hearing, supply legible copies of relevant documents, and allow for witness cross-examination. Importantly, the Court clarified that its decision to set aside the order was based on procedural grounds and did not delve into the merits of the case itself.

The Court emphasized the need for expeditious handling of the petitioner's case by the respondent, cautioning against unnecessary delays or adjournments. The order was explicitly stated to apply only to the petitioner's case, ensuring a focused resolution. With these directions and observations, the writ petition was disposed of, providing a clear roadmap for the reevaluation of the petitioner's matter in compliance with the principles of natural justice.