9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on under section 28AB of Customs Act, 1962 and penalty of like amount under section 114A of Customs Act, 1962 on Shri Anoop Rastogi. He challenges the order for being violative of principles of natural justice. The conclusions and findings of the adjudicating authority are not challenged before us. 2. Before we proceed to subject the grounds of appeal to the required level of scrutiny, we consider it necessary to ascertain the circumstances that led to the initiating of proceedings against the appellant. The above four bills of entry were filed for the import of brass scrap against advance licences no.2910003790/13.11.2002 and 2910004143/ 29.01.2003 under the Duty Exemption Entitlement Certificate (DEEC) scheme in the Foreign Trade Policy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng dealt with each of the statements and the documents pertaining to import and export, arrived at the conclusion that the appellant was indeed the importer who had derived the benefit of the fabricated shipping bills. The appellant had not been represented in the personal hearing preceding the issue of the impugned order and, for that reason, has challenged its legality and propriety. It is not in dispute that the appellant had not been heard. The issue for determination is whether adequate opportunity had been afforded to the appellant which he did not avail of. 5. We have perused the show cause notice dated 27th of December 2004 issued to the appellant whose address is shown as 102, Savera Society, Plot No.87, Sector-3, Koper Khairane, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pril 2005 as appearing in the speed post receipt affixed on the copy of the letter filed with the appeal. A further reminder dated 26th September 2005 is claimed to have been issued again through the medium of India Post on 26th September 2005 as appearing in the speed post receipt attached to a copy of the letter placed on file. Yet another reminder of 26th October 2005 is also seen in the appeal papers. 7. Considering that the impugned order dated 22nd June 2005 was issued on 27th June 2005, the letters, other than the first purported communication of change of address, is of little relevance. Nevertheless, it is interesting that a letter dated 23rd December 2005 seeking a copy of the adjudication order, was promptly responded to on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
