2022 (3) TMI 205 - HC - Customs

Violation of principle of natural justice - documents not provided to the petitioner upon which the adjudicating authority relied in passing the order of adjudication - legal rights to cross-examine those witnesses on whose statement the adjudicating authority has relied, not allowed - HELD THAT - On perusal of the impugned order of the Appellate Authority, it is found that the Appellate Authority has not considered and specifically dealt with particularly the aforesaid two grounds in his order and it can be said that the impugned order is a non-speaking order in this regard even without going into the merits of the case. In this case there was violation of principle of natural justice and the impugned order of the Appellate Authority is a non-speaking order on the aforesaid grounds taken by the petitioner in its memorandum of appeal filed before the Appellate Authority and accordingly, the impugned order dated 28th February, 2017 is set aside and remanded back to the Appellate Authority concerned on these two limited issues/grounds, which are non providing of documents to the petitioner upon which adjudicating authority has relied and denying the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses in question on whose statement adjudicating authority has relied in its adjudication order. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to impugned order of Appellate Authority/Commissioner of Customs based on violation of natural justice principles, failure to provide documents to petitioner, denial of right to cross-examine witnesses, Appellate Authority's non-speaking order, violation of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the impugned order of the Appellate Authority/Commissioner of Customs, alleging violation of natural justice principles by the adjudicating authority. The petitioner contended that the adjudicating authority failed to provide the necessary documents and denied the petitioner the right to cross-examine witnesses whose statements were relied upon in the adjudication order adverse to the petitioner's interests. Specific grounds were raised in the memorandum of appeal before the Appellate Authority, highlighting the failure to provide documents and the denial of the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses.

The Court noted that the Appellate Authority's order did not address the petitioner's specific grounds, indicating a lack of consideration on crucial issues. The Court found merit in the petitioner's argument regarding the violation of natural justice principles and the non-speaking nature of the impugned order. It was observed that the Appellate Authority did not adequately address the concerns raised by the petitioner, leading to a remand of the case back to the Appellate Authority for reconsideration on the issues of failing to provide documents to the petitioner and denying the right to cross-examine witnesses.

The Court clarified that the remand was limited to these two specific issues, while the rest of the order was not interfered with. The Appellate Authority was directed to conclude the matter and issue a final order within six months from the date of communication of the Court's order. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions, emphasizing the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice and ensuring a fair hearing for all parties involved in the adjudication process.