9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is seen that the order states that the only evidence that might exist in the favour of Revenue could be in the non existing statement which appellant and Tribunal assumed to be existing. The order already observes that there is no evidence to support the charge made under Regulation 10(d) of CBLR, 2018 except for this non existing statement. Therefore, there is clearly an apparent mistake in the order. Moreover, the order in the present form cannot be acted upon as there is no statement that can be provided to the applicant. ROM application allowed. - Customs Miscellaneous (ROM) Application No. 10236 of 2020, Custom Appeal No. 12628 of 2019 - M/10181/2020 - Dated:- 27-8-2020 - MEMBER (JUDICIAL), MR. RAMESH NAIR AND MEMBER (TECHNICAL ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertion, Tribunal has set aside the impugned order in respect of charges relating to regulation 10 (d) of CBLR, 2018 and remanded the matter. Learned Counsel pointed out that there is no other statement recorded and, therefore, in terms of remand order, no statement can be provided to the appellant. The only statement recorded was given to the appellant and the observation made in para 7.2 is not based on any statement or other evidence. 2.1 Learned Counsel pointed out that in view of above, it is apparent that there has been a mistake apparent on record in so far as Tribunal has directed remand of the matter for decision after supplying a non existing statement. In view of above, he pointed out that since the order of Tribunal in para 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Regulation 10(d) of CBLR, 2018, we find that Adjudicating Authority has not countered the arguments given by the appellant. There is no evidence cited by the Adjudicating Authority to establish that the appellant had any preknowledge of the nature of cargo. The statement on which the Adjudicating Authority has relied on, has not been provided to the appellant. In view of the fact that statement has not been provided, the impugned order cannot be upheld as the charge has been confirmed on the basis of said statement. In view of above, the allegation made under Regulation 10(d) of CBLR, 2018 are set-aside and the issue is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh decision, after providing the copy of the said statement to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
