2017 (5) TMI 1233

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... able - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner.
Harsha Devani And A. S. Supehia, JJ. Mr Devan Parikh, Senior Advocate With Mr Dhaval Shah, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr Chintan H Dave, Advocate for the Respondent JUDGMENT ( Per : Honourable Ms. Justice Harsha Devani ) 1. Rule. Mr. Chintan Dave, learned senior standing counsel waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents No.2 and 3. 2. The petition is directed against the order-in-original dated 25.03.2017 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, ICD Khodiyar, Gandhinagar, whereby the assessable value of Glass Chaton (Beads) Crystal of different sizes has been discarded and the value has been enhanced. 3. Mr. Devan Parikh, Senior Advocate, learned c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r once again addressed a communication to the respondents to afford an opportunity of personal hearing and requested them to communicate the basis of enhancement. It was submitted that by the impugned order dated 25.03.2017, the third respondent has, without affording any opportunity of personal hearing and without supplying the requisite documents, passed the impugned order in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. It was submitted that having regard to the fact that the impugned order has been passed ex parte without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the same being violative of the principles of natural justice, deserves to be quashed and set aside and the matter is required to be remanded to the third .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted 25.03.2017, no such opportunity of hearing has been granted to the petitioner. On reading the impugned order in its entirety, it is evident that there is no reference to any submission on behalf of the petitioner nor is there anything to indicate that any opportunity of hearing has been given to the petitioner. Admittedly, therefore, the impugned order has been passed ex parte without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and hence, is clearly in breach of the principles of natural justice which renders the same unsustainable. Under the circumstances, the petitioner has made out a case for exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, despite the fact that the subject matter of challenge before the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X