9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 314X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bility of petition - petitioner is having an alternate remedy - Penalty u/s 114A of CA - suppression of facts or not - HELD THAT:- On perusal of the order, it is seen that only three persons have attended the personal hearing, rest of them did not respond to the summons. It is also seen that the petitioner has specifically requested for cross examination - Respondents submitted that the petitioner has mentioned designation but has not mentioned the name of the official, hence such request cannot be considered. This Court is of the view that such contention of the respondents cannot be entertained, since the official who was serving at that point of time is the appropriate person and the respondents are well aware of such persons rather tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... panies Act. The petitioner has imported fabrics under seven Bills of Entry during the period from August 2010 to October 2010. The petitioner was in need of Duty Free Replenishment Certificate license to avail tax exemption while clearing the aforesaid fabrics from Tuticorin Port. One Murugan was the petitioner's Custom House Agent in Thoothukudi and he informed that one Ramesh Daswani has a DFRC license, dated 02.10.2005, along with TRA, which could be used to get duty exemption for 275000 SQM. Hence, the petitioner had purchased the said license and thereafter, imported the goods. A show cause notice, dated 15.01.2009, was issued alleging that the DFRC license was actually issued for import of cotton processed fabrics of GSM 95+/-10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r dated 23.10.2010 and the relevant portion is extracted hereunder: We refer to our letter dated 19/08/2010 wherein we had made a preliminary submission and also requested for cross-examination of the persons mentioned therein. Accordingly, we had requested for adjournment. We have since not received any communication to our said letter dated 19/08/2010, we therefore once again enclose our letter dated 19/08/10 and request you to allow cross-examination and fix the hearing date. 5. The petitioner has circulated the list of persons, which the petitioner wants to cross examine which is extracted hereunder: i. Mr. Gopal Choudhry ii. Mr. Ramesh Daswani iii. Mr. Deepak Bajaj iv. Mr. Ramchandra Bhoite v. Mr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... along with cross examination. When the petitioner has specifically sought for cross examination by giving a list of persons, denying opportunity of cross examination is clear violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, this Court is remitting the matter back to the authorities. The authorities shall grant personal hearing as well as the authorities shall allow cross examination especially to the list of persons which the petitioner has mentioned in the list of persons. The petitioner is at liberty to submit any fresh list of persons whom the petitioner wants to cross examine. The enquiry shall be completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. With the above said observation and di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
