9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 886X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ropriate that the present case should be tagged with the case of Hindustan Sales Agencies (supra) which is still pending before the adjudicating authority for denovo adjudication - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assesse. - C/41659/2013 - - - Dated:- 14-10-2014 - P K Das and R Periasami, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr G Derrick Sam, Adv. For the Respondent : Ms Indira Sisupal, AC (AR) JUDGEMENT Per: P K Das: As the issue lies in a narrow compass, after disposing the stay application, we proceed to decide the appeal itself. 2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants imported Medium Density Fibre Boards / Plain Particle Boards under the cover of 18 Bills of Entry during the perio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matter to the adjudicating authority with certain directions. The relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced below:- 5. After giving careful consideration to the submissions, we have found good reasons to remand this case to the adjudicating authority. Shri Sathyanarayana of M/s. V.R. Marketing, the intending agent in India of the Malaysian supplier of the goods, is no more. It is not in dispute that he died on 22-4-2006, the day next to the date on which his statement, which was inculpatory of the appellant, was recorded by the DRI under Section 108 of the Customs Act. It was his laptop which yielded certain documents, which were also inculpatory of the appellant. These documents included certain accounts (which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lues - all in precise arithmetical terms. The undisputed fact is that all the Bills of Entry were in DRI's custody and there is no reference to copies of these documents having been required to be produced or actually produced by Shri Jain on 9-8-2006. This part of the investigative proceedings is not beyond blame and, therefore, the plea of the appellant to cross-examine the DRI officers who interrogated him on 9-8-2006 cannot be lightly brushed aside. The party wanted to file a final reply to show-cause notice after obtaining the results of cross-examination (if allowed). As cross-examination was not allowed, there was no filing of final reply. It is also on record that no perusal hearing was held in this case. 6. For all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
