2008 (2) TMI 754

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r]. This appeal is directed against the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. GOA/CUS/SB/06/2006 dated 20-3-2007. 2. When the matter was called out, the learned SDR submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not followed the Rule 5 of the Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982, inasmuch as that the Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the evidences, which was not before the adjudicating authority to come .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vestigation has been made at foreign customer s end. On the other hand the appellants have explained the possession of Euros, which were brought by his Son-in-Law during visit to India. It can be noticed from the above reproduced order that the respondent herein had made some statement and admitted about the illegal possession of foreign currency. On a mere perusal of the order of the adjudicat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ch was not produced before the original authority. As such, I am of the view that the impugned order is liable to set aside. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the original authority to reconsider the issue afresh. Both sides are at liberty to produce evidences in their support. The adjudicating auth .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X