9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eclared by the appellant - The first time the appellant raised the non-availability of certain documents and violation of principles of natural justice is only in March 2010 when they filed the reply to the show cause notice. The claim that the statements given by the proprietor in 2008 were not voluntary is not acceptable as such claim is made in 2010. There is no violation of principles of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his personal difficulty as well as non-receipt of due notice and delayed receipt of final order, we find it proper to restore the appeals to the original numbers in the interest of justice. The restored appeals were taken up for decision on merit with the consent of both the sides. 2. The learned Counsel for the appellant contested the impugned orders upholding the denial of exemption availab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s evident from the statements recorded on two different occasions, namely on 20th August 2008 and 25th August 2008. The said statements have never been retracted till date. The appellants claim before the lower authorities is only an after-thought to get a relief where no legal basis is available for such relief. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal record. We have also exam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orded against them. We note it has been categorically recorded in the impugned order that the proprietor of the importer were shown the test reports which found the goods not as declared by the appellant. We have also perused the contents of the statement which categorically stated that the proprietor has been shown the test reports at the time of recording statements. He had admitted the contents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
