9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 856X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er passed by the original adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) are in gross violation of principles of natural justice and therefore it is a fit case which is required to be remanded back for re-adjudication. Section 128A(3) empowers the Commissioner (Appeals) to make such further enquiry as may be necessary to pass such order as he may think proper - the Commissioner (Appeals) can exercise power vested with adjudicating authority in accepting evidence and making further enquiry as he deems proper after providing opportunity to the appellant to cross examine the witnesses. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal No. C/87595,87597 to 87599/17, C/87722, 87724/17 - A/87918-87923/2018 - Dated:- 16-11-2018 - Dr. Suve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty, after they were being put to notice and their replies were found to be unsatisfactory by the adjudicating authority. Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the said order and hence the appeal before this Tribunal. 3. During the course of hearing of the appeal, ld. Counsels for the appellant raised several points while leading his argument including the fact that CHA should not be prosecuted under the Customs Act while separate procedure for violation of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulation, 2013 empowers the Commissioner of Customs to make necessary enquiry and follow subsequent action. He also pointed out that exporter is not a party to this proceeding, on whose behest the alleged act of omission and commission was made by the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant to produce any evidence before the Commissioner (Appeals) for the scrutiny of the order-in-original passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs (Exports) but the said order clearly reveals at para 31 that during the course of personal hearing, the appellants failed to establish the ground for cross examination for which such permission was refused. When the entire case is based on the statement of those employees, the veracity of which was not tested by permitting the appellants to cross examine them, the same cannot be considered as a complete piece of evidence on which reliance can be placed. Such an order passed by the original adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) are in gross violation of principles of natural ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
